-And the reduction of workplace accidents and serious incidents
Malcolm BallantyneRelated papers
"What is the correlation between safety management systems and International Organization for Standardization (ISO 45001:2018 -OHSAS 18001:2007) and the reduction of workplace accidents and serious incidents?"
Abstract The construction industry in the United Kingdom (UK) plays a role in economic development, in creating the built environment and in providing employment. However, the industry also has a reputation as a high-risk working environment with persistent high levels of accidents and fatalities. There are regulations and industry-specific legislation governing safety in this sector; however, the poor accident record persists. There are several underlying reasons for this performance, including the competitive nature of the industry, high levels of fragmentation and reliance on small and medium (SME) sized organisations that do not have the capital to invest in safety. The difficulty therefore is that, based on this researcher’s experience, even when a main contractor has a robust and certified safety management system in place, safety can be compromised by SMEs that are not certified. This research will look at the correlation between the design and implementation of standardised safety management systems such as OHSAS: 1800:2007, ISO 45001:2018 and accident reduction within the industry, focusing firstly on the usefulness of these systems and secondly on the use of these systems by SMEs in construction. The research asks whether there is proof that certification will reduce accidents in construction and enhance safety, and considers the challenges faced by SMEs in seeking certification. The study also looks at what measures can be taken by the main contractor to enhance safety of non-certified subcontractors. Standardised forms of safety management provide a structured framework for health and safety management - a process for planning, designing, implementing, controlling and monitoring safety performance. The process should be supported with training and education and the aim should be continual improvement in accident reductions. The research is progressed using a survey strategy with primary data collected using a questionnaire survey of professionals active in the construction industry and a case study of practical measures adopted by main contractors in managing subcontractors on site. The study concludes that standardised forms of safety management can reduce accidents; however, to secure long-term benefits it is essential that all levels of management commit to the process. In addition, safety management processes should be integrated into other business management processes and objectives. The study also finds that subcontractors are SMEs with low profit margins, without capital to invest in safety management systems. However main contractors can address this issue by providing an inclusive working environment, with training for all personnel as this facilitates a safety of culture on site and enhances safety. This research recommends that, regardless of the safety management system, key essentials in reducing accidents in all organisations are risk management, management’s commitment to safety, the development of a culture of safety on site, and effective communication and training, with worker involvement in all aspects of the safety management process.
Strategies for improving safety performance in construction firms
Accident Analysis & Prevention, 2016
Negotiating safety practice in small construction companies
Safety Science, 2014
Factors influencing the performance of safety programmes in the Ghanaian construction industry
Acta Structilia
A Study of Safety Management in the Nigerian Construction Industry
Given the hazardous nature of the construction industry world over, the need for an effective safety management system which aims at forestalling the risks and hazards inherent on site has been reiterated by recent studies and applicable laws. Studies however show that level of effectiveness differs from country to country; industry to industry and from company to company. This study therefore undertakes both qualitative and quantitative investigation into the safety management system of a Nigeria-based construction company with a view of determining how compliant the system is to international standards. Identifying five major components and fifteen elements in the study, both primary and secondary data were collected through personal interviews, structured questionnaire and observation and these were analysed using One Sample t-test at 0.05 level of significance. The results show that though a form safety management system exists in the company, the system is however poorly organised and consequently, it is characterised by ineffectiveness and poor documentation. It is therefore recommended that management gives an urgent attention to the company's safety management system with an intense interest to standardise its operations and functionality. As a roadmap to achieving this, the paper proposes an integrated " PCR " safety model based on the " TAB " philosophy.
Factors influencing the implementation of a safety management system for construction sites
Safety Science, 2012
Safety Management in the Jordanian Construction Industry
Jordan Journal of Civil Engineering, 2010
Using Empirical Data to Identigy Effective Safety Management Strategies in Construction Companies
2011
This paper explores the use of mathematical analyses methods to identify the components of effective management strategies applied by a safety management organization in construction companies. The authors believe that effective methods and strategies are closely related to Lean Construction strategies and one objective of this research was to explore this hypothesis. In Chile, “Safety Mutuals” are nonprofit organizations that provide medical insurance and technical assistance on safety management to companies in all the economic areas. In the last 40 years these institutions have helped to reduce accidents to 1/5th in the Chilean companies. Over the years they have introduced hundreds of methods/practices to prevent and mitigate accidents; however, there is little evidence of the effectiveness of individual or combined methods used in companies to manage safety issues. The authors selected a sample of over 1100 construction firms, and 221 individual methods/practices applied in the...
Encyclopedia of Quality of Life and Well-Being ResearchEncyclopedia of Quality of Life and Well-Being Research
Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics, Volume 13, Second Edition by Author Unknown
Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics, Volume 13, Second Edition by Author Unknown
University of Strathclyde
The Centre for Lifelong Learning
“What is the correlation between safety management systems and International
Organization for Standardization (ISO 45001:2018 - OHSAS 18001:2007) and the
reduction of workplace accidents and serious incidents?”
By
Malcolm Ballantyne
A thesis presented in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of
Master of Science
In
Safety and Risk Management
(Submitted 22nd May 2019)
Word Count 12000+- 15%
(Actual Word Count 13271)
Abstract
The construction industry in the United Kingdom (UK) plays a role in economic
development, in creating the built environment and in providing employment. However,
the industry also has a reputation as a high-risk working environment with persistent
high levels of accidents and fatalities. There are regulations and industry-specific
legislation governing safety in this sector; however, the poor accident record persists.
There are several underlying reasons for this performance, including the competitive
nature of the industry, high levels of fragmentation and reliance on small and medium
(SME) sized organisations that do not have the capital to invest in safety. The difficulty
therefore is that, based on this researcher’s experience, even when a main contractor
has a robust and certified safety management system in place, safety can be
compromised by SMEs that are not certified.
This research will look at the correlation between the design and implementation of
standardised safety management systems such as OHSAS: 1800:2007, ISO
45001:2018 and accident reduction within the industry, focusing firstly on the
usefulness of these systems and secondly on the use of these systems by SMEs in
construction. The research asks whether there is proof that certification will reduce
accidents in construction and enhance safety, and considers the challenges faced by
SMEs in seeking certification. The study also looks at what measures can be taken by
the main contractor to enhance safety of non-certified subcontractors.
Standardised forms of safety management provide a structured framework for health
and safety management - a process for planning, designing, implementing, controlling
and monitoring safety performance. The process should be supported with training and
education and the aim should be continual improvement in accident reductions.
The research is progressed using a survey strategy with primary data collected using
a questionnaire survey of professionals active in the construction industry and a case
study of practical measures adopted by main contractors in managing subcontractors
on site.
The study concludes that standardised forms of safety management can reduce
accidents; however, to secure long-term benefits it is essential that all levels of
ii
management commit to the process. In addition, safety management processes should
be integrated into other business management processes and objectives. The study
also finds that subcontractors are SMEs with low profit margins, without capital to
invest in safety management systems. However main contractors can address this
issue by providing an inclusive working environment, with training for all personnel as
this facilitates a safety of culture on site and enhances safety.
This research recommends that, regardless of the safety management system, key
essentials in reducing accidents in all organisations are risk management,
management’s commitment to safety, the development of a culture of safety on site,
and effective communication and training, with worker involvement in all aspects of the
safety management process.
iii
Abstract .................................................................................................................... ii
Table of Contents .................................................................................................... iv
Tables, Figures and Questions ................................................................................ vi
Acknowledgements ................................................................................................. ix
Acronym’s ................................................................................................................ x
Table of Contents
1 Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Research Context ......................................................................................................... 1
1.1.1 Construction Industry .................................................................................................. 1
1.1.2 Safety and Accidents in the Construction Industry ...................................................... 4
1.1.3 Reducing Accidents, Fatalities and Enhancing Safety................................................ 7
1.2 Project Objectives ......................................................................................................... 9
1.3 Research Question ..................................................................................................... 10
1.4 Aim and Objectives ..................................................................................................... 11
1.5 Structure of the Thesis ................................................................................................ 11
2 Literature Review .......................................................................................................... 12
2.1 Safety Management and Safety Management Systems .............................................. 12
2.2 Occupational Health and Safety Standards and Certification ...................................... 13
2.2.1 OHSAS 18001:2007 ................................................................................................. 13
2.2.2 ISO45001:2018......................................................................................................... 16
2.2.3 Certification in relation to accident reduction and safety............................................ 16
2.3 Certification in relation to accident reduction and safety .............................................. 17
2.4
Summary of Literature Review .................................................................................... 21
3 Methodology .................................................................................................................. 22
3.1 Research Philosophy and Approach ........................................................................... 22
3.2 Research Strategy ...................................................................................................... 23
3.3 Data Collection and Analysis ....................................................................................... 23
3.3.1 Questionnaires.......................................................................................................... 24
3.3.1.1 Participants............................................................................................................. 24
3.3.1.2 Procedure ............................................................................................................... 24
3.4 Summary of Research Design..................................................................................... 25
4 Results .......................................................................................................................... 26
4.1 Questionnaire Responses ........................................................................................... 26
4.2 Case Study: Rok Building, The Southampton Job Centre Plus Contract ..................... 41
5 Discussion ..................................................................................................................... 43
5.1 Correlation between safety management systems and the reduction of workplace
accidents and serious incidents................................................................................... 43
5.2 Safety Management Systems and Small Organisations in the construction Industry ... 44
iv
5.3 Safety Culture and Accidents ........................................................................................ 48
6
Recommendations ........................................................................................................ 50
7
Conclusions and Reflection ........................................................................................... 52
7.1 Findings and Conclusion ....................................................................................52
7.2 Reflection............................................................................................................53
8
References ..................................................................................................................54
Annex A: .............................................................................................................. A1
A1. Introduction ................................................................................................... A3
A1.1 General Information..................................................................................... A3
A1.2 Participation email letter .............................................................................. A4
A1.2.1 Ethics Approval ........................................................................................ A6
A1.3 Focus Group Transcript ............................................................................... A9
A1.3.1 Table Summary of focus group results (general group) .............................A11
A1.3.2 Table Summary of focus group results (management group) ....................A12
A1.4 Survey Questions ........................................................................................ A5
Annex B .............................................................................................................. B1
B1.1 Introduction ................................................................................................. B2
B1.2 Processing Results ..................................................................................... B3
B1.3 Results from Questionnaires ....................................................................... B3
Annex C .............................................................................................................. C2
C1.0 Contents ..................................................................................................... C3
C1.1 Cronbach’s Alpha ........................................................................................ C4
C1.2 Likert Scale ................................................................................................. C5
C1.4 References ................................................................................................. C6
v
Tables, Figures and Questions
Page
Number
List of Tables
Introduction
Table 1.1.
Value of Construction Output by Type of Work (Rhodes 2015, Pg. 2
p.2).
Chapter 2
Table 2.1.
Standards for general safety management systems (Li and Pg. 13
Guldenmund 2018, p.100, Table 2).
Table 4.1.
A Table detailing the Professional Roles of the survey Pg. 29
questionnaire
List of Figures
Page
Number
Introduction
Figure 1.1.
Composition of the UK Construction Sector (BIS 2013, p.1, Pg. 3
Figure 1.1).
Figure 1.2.
Estimated annual cases of all self-reported workplace injuries in Pg. 4
construction (HSE 2017, p.12, Figure 12).
Figure 1.3.
Non-fatal injuries by injury type for over 7-day injuries (HSE Pg. 5
2017, p.13, Figure 15).
Figure 1.4.
Main Injury kinds for fatal injuries to workers in the construction Pg. 6
sector by injury kind (2012-2017) (HSE 2017, p.11, Figure 10).
Figure 1.5.
Number of fatal injuries by main industry group 2017-2018, and Pg. 6
annual average 2013-2018 (HSE 2018, p.4, Figure 2).
Chapter 2
Figure 2.1.
Deming Cycle for Continuous Improvement (Sanz-Calcedo et Pg. 14
al., 2015, p.142, Figure 1).
Figure 2.2.
Timeline: The relation between the adoption of the OHSAS Pg. 15
18001 and firm performance (safety performance and labour
productivity) (Abad et al., 2013, p.48, Figure 1).
Questionnaire Responses Charts
Page
Number
Chapter 4
Figure 4.1.
Responses to Question (1a.) Gender Demographic
Pg. 27
Figure 4.2.
Responses to Question (1b.) Age Group
Pg. 27
Figure 4.3.
Responses to Question (1c.) Salary band (GBP) Monthly
Pg. 28
Table (1d)
Responses to Question (1d.) Asked the participants about their
professional background and as shown in Table 4.1.
Results of the responses to: Question 1.
In your organisation would you consider International
standardisation (ISO) as a contributor to the reduction of
accidents and incidents related to safety?
Results of the responses to: Question 2.
In the context of your organisation? Do staff understand the
reasoning for management systems and how having them can
reduce the likelihood of accidents occurring?
Results of the responses to: Question 3.
Do you think having ISO & OHSAS as part of your management
system adds value and helps to reduce accidents in the
workplace?
Pg. 29
Figure 4.4
Figure 4.5.
Figure 4.6.
vi
Pg. 30
Pg. 30
Pg. 31
Figure 4.7.
Figure 4.8.
Figure 4.9.
Figure 4.10.
Figure 4.11.
Figure 4.12.
Figure 4.13.
Figure 4.14.
Figure 4.15.
Figure 4.16.
Figure 4.17.
Figure 4.18.
Figure 4.19.
Figure 4.20.
Figure 4.21.
vii
Results of the responses to: Question 4.
Do you think that ISO & OHSAS standardisation can improve
performance and reduce the need for additional management
systems in your organisation?
Results of the responses to: Question 5.
Do management systems play a part in reduction of accidents
and serious incidents?
Results of the responses to: Question 6.
Do you think that ISO & OHSAS do not add value to your
organisation or just add to workload of the internal auditors?
Results of the responses to: Question 7.
Do you consider having a robust management system as
playing any part in the reduction of accidents or serious
incidents?
Results of the responses to: Question 8.
Do you consider non-compliances raised during ISO & OHSAS
Audits as adding value in the reduction of accidents or serious
incidents?
Results of the responses to: Question 9.
Do you think that senior management consider ISO & OHSAS
as a method for promoting the company and only carryout lip
service to non-compliances raised during audits?
Results of the responses to: Question 10.
Do you consider your senior management as proactive towards
internal and external ISO & OHSAS Audits with the aim of
improving safety standards within the organisation?
Results of the responses to: Question 11.
In Certifying your Management System do you think it enables
your organisation to prove that it conforms to the specification?
Results of the responses to: Question 12.
Integrated Management Systems, it should also be possible to
combine – integrate - common or similar elements of two or
more management subsystems?
Results of the responses to: Question 13.
In the case of an effectively managed integrated system, the
performance of the regulated activities will improve as well as
result in more efficient paperwork of the administration.
Results of the responses to: Question 14.
One common management system has several advantages, but
there could also be disadvantages?
Results of the responses to: Question 15.
The fundamental idea is not to rationalise the cost for the
administrative process as such by using a certain management
system. But what are the long-term benefits, and do they
outweigh the costs?
Results of the responses to: Question 16.
A management system is simply a lot of common sense put into
a formal dress–bringing better order and structure to the way
things are managed?
Results of the responses to: Question 17.
Do you think that Top Management express their commitment
towards continual improvement of your integrated management
system and policy?
Results of the responses to: Question 18.
Pg. 31
Pg. 32
Pg. 32
Pg. 33
Pg. 33
Pg. 34
Pg. 34
Pg. 35
Pg. 35
Pg. 36
Pg. 36
Pg. 37
Pg. 38
Pg. 38
Pg. 39
Figure 4.22.
Figure 4.23.
Figure 4.24.
Figure 4.25.
Figure 4.1.4.
viii
In your opinion do top management ensure that the availability
of resources meet the business requirement or is this a constant
issue to get funds to implement
Results of the responses to: Question 19.
Do you consider Internal Audit as a systematic and independent
documented process for obtaining reliable information on how
your management systems are performing?
Results of the responses to: Question 20.
By certification or registration, the organisation has
acknowledged to have included the requirements of a certain
system/standard and that these requirements are followed.
Results of the responses to: Question 21.
The certificate can simplify communication with external
stakeholders?
Results of the responses to: Question 22.
The benefits of OSHAS18001 encourages top management to
take a critical look at areas that are vulnerable
Hazards information Board (HSE 2006, p.2).
Pg. 39
Pg. 40
Pg. 41
Pg. 41
Pg. 42
Acknowledgements
From a professional standpoint, I would like to thank my tutor Malcolm Holmes,
Callum MacDonald and Barry Baker for constant support and guidance throughout
the development of this project.
I would also like to acknowledge for continual support during the past two years the
following Organisations.
University of Strathclyde for making the program available;
The participants for partaking in the research process, without them this
project would not have happened;
My Employer, Dhuruma O&M Company Saudi Arabia for allowing the time to
carry out research;
Mr. Aamir Anwar CFO Dhuruma O&M Company for legal advise and support;
ENGIE Dubai & Paris, for the support in completing this program and allowing
access to all ENGIE Employees worldwide;
Mr. Muhammed Saad Khalil from Bureau VERITAS Saudi Arabia for access to
their library of ISO & OHSAS Standards;
On a personal note, I would like to express my thanks to my wife Ruth for her words
of motivation, support, and patience throughout the program.
ix
Acronym’s
Acronym
BSI
CDM
CEO
CFO
DVD
GBP
GB
HM
HSE
ISO
MSD
NQA
OHS
OHSAS
OHMS
OSR
SMEs
SSR
SPSS
UK
x
Description
British Standards Institute
Construction Design Management
Chief Executive Officer
Chief Financial Officer
Digital Versatile Disc
Great British Pound
Great Britain
Her Majesty's Government
Health and Safety Executive
International Organization for Standardization
Musculoskeletal Disorders
Nuclear Quality Assurance
Occupational Health and Safety
Occupational Health and Safety Assessment Series
Occupational Health and Safety Management System
Organisational Safety Response
Small Medium-sized Enterprises
Supervisor Safety Response
Statistical Package for the Social Sciences
United Kingdom
Chapter 1
1 Introduction
There is a substantial volume of legislation and regulations governing health and safety
in the workplace, yet the fact is that more than 7 600 people die each day from workrelated accidents, equating to more than 2.78 million every year (International
Organization for Standardization (ISO) 2018a). Apart from the emotional cost of such
events, this also generates a “burden of occupational injuries and diseases” for
employers, employees and the wider economy, in terms of workdays lost to illness, the
financial cost of accidents, fatalities and associated insurance premiums (ISO 2018a,
p.1). This research explores safety management systems and accidents focusing on
small organisations in the construction industry in the United Kingdom (UK). In the
interests of clarity, it is noted that small organisations are defined as those employing
less than 20 people. This chapter sets the study in context, providing a background to
the research and presenting the aim and objectives of the study.
1.1 Research Context
This research focuses on occupational safety in the construction industry in the UK: as
such it is essential to set the problem being examined in context. This section explores
the construction industry and the problems within that industry which prompt this study.
1.1.1 Construction Industry
The construction industry in the UK plays a key role in developing the built environment
and in contributing to the national economy, attracting inward investment and providing
employment (HM Government 2013). According to Rhodes (2015) output from the
industry is estimated at £103 billion, which equates to 6.5% in Gross Value Added to
the total economy. The industry employs approximately 2.1 million people, which
represents 6.2% of the total employment in the UK. It is noted that the industry can be
defined in terms of type of work activities with private and public sector work, each of
which can be sub-divided into housing, infrastructure and commercial properties.
Page | 1
Table 1.1. Value of Construction Output by Type of Work (Rhodes 2015, p.2).
The Department for Business Innovation and Skills (BIS 2013) add that the industry
can also be defined in terms of the services offered, which it is argued is important as
it defines the nature of the business and indicates high levels of fragmentation in an
extensive supply chain. For instance, it is noted that as shown in Figure 1.1, that the
industry can be divided into contracting, services and products, with contracting
forming the largest sector in terms of output, contribution to the economy and
employment.
Page | 2
Figure 1.1 Composition of the UK Construction Sector (BIS 2013, p.1, Figure 1.1)
As illustrated in the above figure, the contracting sector, which is the focus of this
research, employs over 2 million workers within an estimated 234,000 businesses
involved in construction of buildings, civil engineering projects such as tunnels,
highways and bridges and in specialised construction activities such as demolition,
roofing and electrical work. It is noted that these specialists are typically referred to as
subcontractors within the industry.
Myers (2016) points out that the construction industry is susceptible to fluctuations in
the economy, and this fact, coupled with evolving materials and technology, has
resulted in an industry which relies on subcontracting work. The BIS (2013) agree,
noting that the prevalence of subcontracting in the industry has created a fragmented
sector, where a construction site is generally managed by a single main contractor with
the physical work carried out by a multitude of subcontractors. For example, BIS (2013)
suggest that for a typical large building project with a contract value of £20-£25 million,
the main contractor will directly manage around 70 subcontracts of which a large
proportion are small organisations. It is argued that this results in a fragmented project
delivery, increasing management risks particularly as most of these subcontractors are
small to medium sized organisations, the bulk of whom employ less than 10 workers.
In addition, it is noted that many construction workers are self-employed (Rhodes
2017), with the Health and Safety Executive (HSE 2017) indicating that 42% of workers
in this industry are self-employed contract workers. It is argued that this high level of
fragmentation adversely affects the health and safety performance of the industry
(Arewa and Farrell 2012; Arocena and Nuez 2010).
1.1.2 Safety and Accidents in the Construction Industry
The construction industry has an unenviable reputation as a high-risk workplace, with
high levels of work-related illnesses, accidents and fatalities (Zhou et al., 2015). The
HSE (2017) point out that each year an estimated 80,000 construction workers in Great
Britain (GB) suffer from a work-related illness, including approximately 52,000 cases
of musculoskeletal disorders (MSD), 12,000 cases of stress, depression or anxiety,
and 16,000 cases of other illness including skin or respiratory conditions. These
workers are active throughout the construction sector; however, there is a higher
instance of work-related illnesses in subcontracting organisations, as indicated by the
Page | 3
fact that 32% of these workers are involved in the construction of buildings, 59% are
in specialised construction activities and 9% are in civil engineering.
(i) Duration of time off work
14,000
Cases
resulting in
14,000
29,000
other
29,000
21,000
21,000 cases
resulting in 4-7
Figure 1.2. Estimated annual cases of all self-reported workplace injuries in
construction (HSE 2017, p.12, Figure 12).
It is argued that recent statistics confirm that the industry has a reputation for high
levels of workplace accidents, with approximately 64,000 construction workers
sustaining an injury at work over the past year, 22% of which resulted in absence from
work of more than 7-days, as shown in Figure 1.2. The risk of an accident is evident
throughout construction; however as with work-related illnesses, it is argued that
subcontractors have a higher risk of injury than other workers. This claim is supported
by the fact that of the 64,000 workplace injuries, 32% occurred to workers in
construction of buildings, 58% occurred to workers in specialised construction activities
and 10% occurred to workers in civil engineering (HSE 2017, p.12). The statistics also
indicate that the causal factors in these injuries are avoidable, as shown in Figure 1.3.
Page | 4
Non-fatal injuries type for over 7-day injuries
Struck by moving vehicle
1%
Contact with moving machinery
6%
Injured while handling, lifting or carrying
29%
Struck by moving, including flying falling objects
12%
Slips, trips or falls on same level
21%
Falls from height
10%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
Figure 1.3. Non-fatal injuries by injury type for over 7-day injuries (HSE 2017, p.13,
Figure 15).
It is clear from the above figure that non-fatal injuries typically involve everyday
activities such as lifting or carrying, slipping or tripping in the workplace, or being struck
by a moving vehicle. Falls from height are also a persistent problem in the construction
sector in non-fatal and fatal injuries (HSE 2017).
Non-fatal injuries by injury type for over 7-day injuries
9
Struck by moving vehicle
14
Contact with moving machinery
16
Injured while handling, lifting or carrying
19
Struck by moving, including flying falling objects
19
Slips, trips or falls on same level
97
Falls from height
Figure 1.4. Main Injury kinds for fatal injuries to workers in the construction sector by
injury kind (2012-2017) (HSE 2017, p.11, Figure 10).
Page | 5
The industry also has a reputation for high levels of fatal accidents, with the instance
of fatal injury being three times that of other sectors in the UK (HSE 2017). For
example, there were 30 fatal injuries to workers in the Construction sector in 2016/17,
bringing the total number of fatal injuries to workers to 196 over the past five years.
Most of these fatalities were caused by falling from a height as shown in Figure 1.4,
with other factors including being trapped or being struck by a moving vehicle.
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
Number of fatal injuries by main industry group 2017-2018 and
annual average 2013-2018
38 39
29 28
24 24
15
2017/18
19
15 14
12
8
11 9
Annual average 2013/14-2017/18
Figure 1.5. Number of fatal injuries by main industry group 2017-2018, and annual
average 2013-2018 (HSE 2018, p.4, Figure 2).
It is acknowledged that the construction industry involves physical activity in a dynamic
working environment; however, this does not excuse this poor safety performance or
the fact that, as shown in Figure 1.5, this industry has a significantly higher level of risk
for workers compared to other sectors in the UK. Given the reliance of large
organisations such as main contractors on the work/input of subcontractors, it is
argued that the former could improve safety by understanding how these organisations
operate/implement/manage health and safety.
1.1.3 Reducing Accidents, Fatalities and Enhancing Safety
It is argued that reducing accidents and fatalities in construction requires compliance
with health and safety legislation (HSE 2015), the implementation of an effective health
and safety risk management process, implementation of a robust health and safety
policy which recognises the risks associated with the workplace and activities within
that site, and investment in worker training to alter worker behaviour towards a culture
Page | 6
of safety (Leung et al., 2015; Choudhry 2014; Wu et al., 2015). Demirkesen and Arditi
(2015) argue that effective training can be useful in reducing the number and
seriousness of accidents in construction. Esmaeil et al., (2012) point out that there are
physical measures such as fall arrest systems that can be implemented to reduce
accidents and enhance safety. It is submitted that the development and successful
implementation of such measures depends on effective management processes and
policies. This in turn depends on organisational issues such as the structure of the
organisation, management's commitment to safety, and the effectiveness of safety
training process, as well as the safety culture on site (Demirkesen and Arditi 2015).
A key factor in safety management is the development and implementation of a safety
management plan. There are standards such as, ISO 45001:2018 Occupational health
and safety and/or OHSAS 18001:2007 Health and Safety Management (OHS) which
seek to enhance workplace safety. The latter sets the minimum requirements for
occupational health and safety management with the intention of ensuring that health
and safety forms a fundamental element in any business. This standard is superseded
by ISO 45001, lauded as the first global Occupational Health and Safety (OHS)
management system (British Standards Institute (BSI) 2018). ISO 45001:2018 seeks
to reduce the burden of workplace accidents and fatalities by providing a framework to
improve worker safety, reduce risks and create safer working conditions. The standard
considers international standards such as OHSAS 18001 to optimise safety (ISO
2018a). Mahmoudi et al., (2014) argue that these standards, provide a system which
incorporates leadership and commitment, policy and strategic objectives in resolving
safety concerns. The standards also provide a framework for the organisation to
manage, resource and document safety policies and practices, as well as in assessing
and managing risk, planning, implementing and monitoring performance. Kim et al.,
(2016) add that the effectiveness of such a standard requires a positive safety culture
in the workplace. In other words, the implementation of occupational health and safety
management strategies require consideration of the impact of these changes on the
organisational culture.
Sousa et al., (2015) point out that for the past few decades, there has been increasing
awareness of the need to address and management occupational safety and health
risks in the construction industry. However, despite the achievement of substantial
improvements (HSE 2017), the rate of accidents remains significantly higher than in
Page | 7
other industries (HSE 2018). Sousa et al., (2015) argue that the major reasons for high
risk in the industry include the intrinsic riskiness of the activities and the characteristics
of constructions projects and the financial and economic issues associated with the
implementation of safety measures in a dynamic and highly competitive market.
According to Arewa and Farrell (2012) there is a link between the size of an
organisation and occupational risks, largely since small to medium sized (SME)
organisations have less capital to invest in health and safety management. This is in
part due to what Arewa and Farrell (2012) imply is the disproportionate costs of SMEs
compared to large organisations. There is clearly a moral argument for maintaining a
safe working environment; however, there is also a regulatory requirement including
compliance with the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 and associated regulations,
as well as compliance with the Construction Design and Management (CDM)
regulations 2015 (HSE 2015). There are also financial imperatives for construction
organisations to comply with regulations on safety and risk management in the
industry, particularly as SMEs are less likely to recover from adverse safety events
because of the cost of insurance and associated punitive costs - as such it is imperative
that these organisations comply with legislation (Arewa and Farrell 2012).
In summary, the evidence suggests that there are problems with accidents and
fatalities in the construction industry, and there is a possible link between the use of
SMEs and risk of such events. This research seeks to expand the bank of knowledge
on safety and risk in construction focusing on SMEs. The intention is to establish the
way these organisations manage safety and to consider their adherence to
occupational safety management standards such as ISO 45001 and/or OHSAS 18001.
1.2 Project Objectives
The ISO (2018b, p.16) point out that every 15 seconds a worker dies from a workrelated accident or disease, and 153 people have a work-related injury somewhere in
the world. There is also evidence to suggest that workplace accidents are increasing
despite legislation, regulations and education. This suggests that there is a need for
further interventions in the workplace to protect workers who are “simply doing their
job” (ISO 2018b, p.16). Apart from the social and emotional consequences of
occupational accidents, there are also economic impacts, to the victim of the accident,
the organisation and society in general (ISO 2018b). It is clear from the previous
Page | 8
sections that the construction industry is classified as a high-risk industry and the level
of risk for workers is unacceptable. There have been improvements over the past few
years, in part through greater legislation and regulation of the industry and in part
through public and government pressure on the industry (HSE 2015, 2018; HM
Government 2013; Hughes and Ferret 2012).
This researcher is employed by a medium sized organisation (employing
approximately 120 people) and has first-hand experience of safety and occupational
risks in the construction industry. The organisation has a robust health and safety
management system reinforced by ISO standards and certification. In short, this
organisation has successfully combined ISO standards and health and safety
management systems to create a safe working environment where there is clear
commitment from management and employees to safe working practices. However,
the organisation acts as a main contractor on some projects, subcontracting work to
small subcontracting businesses, that do not have the same level of health and safety
management systems. In this researcher’s experience, the absence of these systems
has a negative impact on the safety and accident performance of the subcontractor,
with knock-on impacts on the researcher’s organisation.
In this researcher’s experience, an organisation can have a clear, well-defined safety
management system in place, reinforced by the existence of the ISO standards, which
can have positive results in terms of a reduction in the risk of accidents and in terms
of productivity for the organisation. However, a construction project typically involves
a myriad of organisations, many of whom are SMEs, and as mentioned in the previous
section these organisations may only employ 10 people or less (Walker 2015; BIS
2013). Based on the researcher’s experience, the construction industry is a competitive
arena, and very often these organisations work to low profit margins. Whilst the
majority comply with legislation and health and safety regulations, there is very little
capital available to invest in extensive training of personnel or, based on this
researcher’s experience, little interest in seeking accreditation/certification for safety
management systems. It is acknowledged that while there is a significant bank of
research on safety in the industry and the benefits of safety management systems,
there is little research on the uptake of standardised forms of occupational safety
management systems by SMEs or consideration of these processes from the
subcontractor perspective. It is hypothesised that this has a negative impact on these
Page | 9
organisations, increasing the risk of accidents for certified organisations working on
the same construction site.
Therefore, this project seeks to understand firstly the benefits and drawbacks of
standardised safety management, and secondly the barriers experienced by
subcontractors. It is submitted that developing a better understanding of these issues,
will enable this researcher’s employer/organisation to develop a more robust strategy
for safety management when working with these non-certified organisations, and
ultimately this will improve safety and quality in projects.
1.3 Research Question
This study asks specific research questions relating to the construction industry and
safety, as follows:
“What is the correlation between safety management systems and International
Organization for Standardization (ISO 45001:2018 - OHSAS 18001:2007) and
the reduction of workplace accidents and serious incidents?”
Is there proof that certification will reduce accidents in construction and enhance
safety?
If there is evidence to support the safety case for certification, and what prevents
SMEs from seeking certification?
1.4 Aim and Objectives
The aim of this study is to investigate whether certification to a standardised form of
safety management system is the optimal solution for SMEs to enhance safety and
reduce accidents in the construction industry.
The objectives of the research are to
Explore the ISO standards used in the construction industry
Ascertain whether standardised health and safety management systems yield
positive outcomes
Assess whether integration of ISO and the health safety management systems
have more significant outcomes in relation to safety and accident reduction
Page | 10
1.5 Structure of this Dissertation
This research continues in chapters, with Chapter 2 Literature Review presenting the
findings of a review of literature on the topic of safety management systems in the
construction and the reduction of workplace accidents and serious incidents. This is
followed by Chapter 3 which sets out the research design used to progress the study.
The results of the data collection are presented in Chapter 4, with a discussion of the
results in Chapter 5. Chapter 6 provides recommendations based on these findings.
The final chapter, Chapter 7 provides a summary of the findings of the research and
the conclusions drawn from these findings. The final chapter also sets out the
limitations of the study and a reflection on the research process.
Page | 11
Chapter 2
2 Literature Review
This chapter presents the findings of a detailed review of academic and peer-reviewed
research on the topic of safety in construction, the factors which contribute to
occupational risk and the relationship between subcontractors and the main contractor.
The review also explores occupational management standards/systems.
2.1 Safety Management and Safety Management Systems
Li and Guldenmund (2018, p.96) maintain that safety management is the concept of
the management of safety, using the same principles and techniques that are used in
other areas of management. In other words, safety is a state or condition of a
workplace whereas safety management is a process of certain activities seeking to
control safety.
Li and Guldenmund (2018, p.96) the purpose or objective of a safety management
process is to protect “human beings, the environment, equipment and property from
unacceptable risk”. This requires an organisational effort to firstly determine the safety
requirements for that workplace based on the risks associated with the workforce and
workplace activities and then to design a safety management structure and process
which mitigates/eliminates/reduces these risks. Thomas (2012) adds that the
effectiveness of safety management is dependent on having a systematic approach to
safety, taking a holistic view of risks and suitable mitigation measures. Li and
Guldenmund (2018) maintain that this requires planning, control, process and
procedures and auditing.
A key element underpinning the design, development and implementation of an
effective safety management system is risk management, whereby potential hazards
are identified and assessed in terms of the risk of accidents, the likelihood of
occurrence and the impact of such an occurrence. Once management understand
each risk, it is then possible to manage the risk through design, training, education, or
by changing the method or processes which lead to such risk. This in turn requires a
good organisational structure, with clear lines of responsibility and accountability
(Hughes and Ferret 2012; Fung et al., 2010). Li and Guldenmund (2018) suggest that
an effective safety management system also requires a control system which ensures
Page | 12
that management have the resources needed to accomplish the organisation’s
objectives with respect to safety.
It is argued that occupational health and safety is a complex process, and given the
above discourse, effective management of safety requires a detailed and integrated
management approach to the issue. It is argued that this process can be simplified if
organisations implement safety management in a structured manner, for example by
using an established certification process. There are several general safety
management standards as illustrated in Table 2.1 (Li and Guldenmund 2018);
however, this research focuses on, namely OHSAS 18001:2007 which is commonly
used in the construction industry and ISO 45001:2018 recently introduced to create a
global approach to safety (ISO 2018b).
Table 2.1. Standards for general safety management systems (Li and Guldenmund
2018, p.100, Table 2).
2.2 Occupational Health and Safety Standards and Certification
It is submitted that the most commonly used occupational health and safety
management standard is the OHSAS 18001 standard, which was first introduced by
BSI in 1999 and updated in 2007 (Mohammadfam et al., 2016).
2.2.1 OHSAS 18001
This standard is based on a management system framework, involving the Plan-DoCheck-Act cycle of safety analysis and prevention. This is generally referred to as the
Deeming cycle for continuous improvement as shown in Figure 2.1.
Page | 13
Figure 2.1. Deming Cycle for Continuous Improvement (Sanz-Calcedo et al., 2015,
p.142, Figure 1).
The structure is like ISO 14001 standards; however, Vinodkumar and Bhasi (2011)
take the view that it is more effective in managing occupational safety. OHSAS 18001
is described as an Occupation Health and Safety Assessment Series for health and
safety management systems, intended to promote organisational control of
occupational health and safety risks to improve for health and safety outcomes from
workers and the organisation. OHSAS 18001 is not a “legal requirement”, yet it is a
recognised specification which can result in an efficient and effective health and safety
management system (Marhani et al., 2013, p.51). Rajaprasad and Chalapathi (2015)
describe the OHSAS as a comprehensive health and safety management system
specifically designed to facilitate organisational control of occupational health and
safety risks and to enable organisations to improve safety performance. According to
Hosny et al., (2014), the OHSAS 18001 process enables an organisation to develop
and implement a safety policy specific to the risks associated with that organisation,
including the establishment of objectives and processes for achieving these objectives
and determining and then implementing the actions necessary to improve safety
performance.
The standard involves planning and implementation, operation, checking and
management review, as well as allocating responsibility for specific tasks, the
development of suitable documentation and audits. It also provides guidance on record
Page | 14
keeping and communication and highlights the need for continuous improvement.
OHSAS 18001 can be considered as a tool to systematically manage and control
occupational risks using a structured management framework. It is also compatible
with other standards such as quality and environmental management processes
(Santos et al., 2013).
The process first requires the development of a formal policy, to ensure organisational
commitment to the process, a clear set of goals for occupational safety and the
formulation of a series of steps linking/integrating occupational safety management
with business performance, quality and environmental management systems. It is
argued that this makes good business sense, given that poor safety performance
typically has a direct impact on productivity and the morale of employees (Rajaprasad
and Chalapathi 2015). Abad et al., (2013) agree, indicating that, as shown in Figure
2.2, the implementation of OHSAS processes and certification can improve productivity
in the long term.
Figure 2.2. Timeline: The relation between the adoption of the OHSAS 18001 and firm
performance (safety performance and labour productivity) (Abad et al., 2013, p.48,
Figure 1).
According to the NQA (2009), this standard is compatible with ISO 9001/14001
providing an opportunity to integrate management systems, thus reducing
organisational bureaucracy and maximising effectiveness and sustainability.
Page | 15
2.2.2 ISO 14001: 2015
ISO 14001:2015 was first published is September 2015, focusing on the lifecycle of a
project and taking account of risk management and/or improving environmental
performance. The standard seeks to ensure that organisations fully integrate
environmental and safety management strategies into the business (Sanz-Calcedo et
al., 2015; BSI 2015). It is noted that this standard is compatible with OHSAS 18000
standard to facilitate the integration of the three key aspects of management, namely
quality, environmental and occupational health and safety management systems
where required (Sanz-Calcedo et al., 2015). According to BSI (2015) the effectiveness
of this integrated form of management can be optimised with management
commitment to the process, effective staff training and conducting internal audits.
2.2.3 ISO 45001: 2018
ISO 45001:2018, which seeks to replace the above standard over the next three years,
specifies the requirements for an occupational health and safety management system,
with guidance for its use. The intention of this standard is to enable organisations to
provide safe and healthy workplaces, prevent work-related injury and ill health, by
encouraging a proactive approach to occupational health and safety performance (ISO
2018a). The standard is applicable to any organisation and can be tailored to the
specific needs and safety objectives of that organisation, facilitating continual
improvement in performance and fulfilment of legal requirements. The standard is
applicable to any organisation “regardless of its size, type and activities” and can be
applied to occupational risks that are under the organisation's control taking account
of the way the organisation operates and the expectations of its employees (ISO
2018a, p.1). This standard does not set out the specific criteria for health and safety
performance, and it is not prescriptive about the design of the management system.
However, it does enable an organisation to develop an effective occupational health
and safety management system that is integrated with wider aspects of safety such as
worker wellbeing, focusing on the risks to workers (ISO 2018a). The ISO (2018b) argue
that this standard provides a mechanism that is suitable for complex supply chains. At
an organisational level the successful use of this document/process depends on senior
management commitment to safety and on organisations providing suitable training
and equipment for workers to carry out their activities in a safe manner.
Page | 16
Based on the above discourse, there are a variety of safety management
standards/systems available for SMEs. Inan et al., (2017) argue that OHSAS
18001:2007 is the dominant management system in industry largely because of its
systematic and structured approach to occupational safety which improves
management’s understanding of measures needed to provide sustainable safety for
workers. In addition, OHSAS “embraces hierarchy by expectations, strategies, and the
organizational structure to maintain an OHS policy” (Inan et al., 2017, p.222).
2.3 Certification in relation to accident reduction and safety
There are several benefits associated with the successful implementation of OHSAS
18001 including the fact that it gives an organisation proactive control of risk and safety
issues, facilitating an improvement in safety performance, as well as compliance with
legislation and regulations. The process includes continual monitoring and auditing as such this contributes to a safer working environment. A crucial element of the
process is safety training of workers, which can result in a better culture of safety within
the workforce, driven by increased awareness of the risks associated with that
workplace and workplace activities (Rajaprasad and Chalapathi 2015).
Ledesma et al., (2009) agree, adding that there is pressure on the construction industry
to become more sustainable and suggesting that this standard can improve safety
which complies with a key principle in sustainable construction. Certification to this
standard can also improve the reputation of an organisation, which can be beneficial
in securing work in a highly competitive industry.
Vinodkumar and Bhasi (2011) conducted an empirical investigation of the influence of
management system certification on the relationship between safety management and
safety performance in the chemical industry, measuring the perceptions of employees
on safety management practices and self-reported safety behaviour. The survey,
which included responses from 1566 workers in the industry, revealed that employees
in companies with OHSAS 18001, ISO 9001 and no certification have different
perception levels of safety variables, with significantly higher safety and risk awareness
in organisations certified in OHSAS 18001 compared with the others. It was concluded
that there are safety management practices associated with certification which can be
useful in predicting and managing safety behaviour. The conclusion drawn from the
study was that OHSAS 18001 certification reduces accidents and organisational
Page | 17
liability, whilst also improving productivity and safety and health of employees
(Vinodkumar and Bhasi 2011).
According to Lo et al., (2014) OHSAS 18001 certification can improve safety,
productivity and profitability. Inan et al., (2017) add that this applies to other types of
standards, with for example ISO 14001 improving safety and environmental
management. Gerbec (2013) argues that these benefits require a degree of
organisational learning with a continual review of the process, including in-depth
analysis of accidents and near-misses to ensure that the safety management system
is suitable for purpose and that workers have adequate training pertaining to the
residual risks in the workplace.
According to Wachter and Yorio (2014), site safety can be improved by proactive
measures such as site inspections, checking subcontractors, and by providing safety
incentives. In addition, a proactive stance in relation to incident investigations and
conducting job hazard analysis, along with the development of on-site safety
committees and safety recordkeeping can reduce the prevalence of unsafe acts on a
construction site. Vinodkumar and Bhasi (2011) argue that the benefit of standardised
systems is that this formalised system can influence this type of behaviour.
Wachter and Yorio (2014), argue that safety management practices are a valuable tool
in improving organisational safety performance and in reducing accidents through
human safety performance. The key to the effectiveness of safety management is
understanding the issue of safety and risk from the human worker perspective and
engaging with workers in developing and then implementing/auditing the safety
management system, whether that is a formal standardised system or an agreed inhouse process. In other words, worker-engagement is the key to safety in the
construction industry, and the success of safety management is dependent on
understanding safety based on the cognitive and emotional attributes of the workforce.
It is insufficient therefore for management to implement a standard such as the
processes associated with OHSAS 18001 standards, as without management and
worker support, there is no guarantee of success. Wachter and Yorio (2014, p.129)
contend that it is necessary for organisations to “nurture the cognitive and emotional
commitment of workers” as part of the safety management system practices. This can
be achieved by embedding behavioural approaches to safety within the design and
Page | 18
implementation of the safety management system. It is submitted that such a focus
optimises the success of the safety management system. Abad et al., (2014) point out
that an increasing number of businesses are integrating different management
systems as this reduces the duplication of managerial tasks and economic losses that
result from operating with multiple management system.
Silva et al., (2017) add to the discourse on worker participation, agreeing that inclusion
of workers can reduce risks in the workplace and suggesting that organisations need
to develop a culture of learning across the organisation and activity sectors. In research
conducted in OHSAS certified and non-certified organisations. Silva et al., (2017)
found that there were different levels of learning practices ranging from the minimal
practices used in some organisation to a higher degree of learning in others, with the
latter typically combining technical and social learning. The study revealed that
companies in the same activity sector can have very different practices, independent
of OHSAS certification, from which the researchers concluded that organisations with
good safety practices generally adhere to a complete learning cycle based on a
detailed understanding of knowledge within the organisation and targeting learning at
an individual, activity and organisational level.
Hasle and Zwetsloot (2011) make a valid point, suggesting that although the uptake of
the above health and safety management standards has increased significantly, there
is no agreement as to the effectiveness of these processes in reducing occupational
risks in the workplace. Mohammadfam et al., (2016) take a slightly different view,
conducting research on the effectiveness of OHSAS in construction. The study
concluded that the OHSAS 18001 standard can improve occupational health and
safety performance if it enhances management commitment and involves workers'
participation in the development and implementation of the strategy. In addition, the
process requires allocation financial resources combined with training of all personnel.
The system needs an effective form of risk assessment, with clearly defined
responsibilities for managing risks and safety outcomes. In addition, the standard is
dependent on effective communication and dissemination of health and safety results
and activities. If these conditions are met, then Mohammadfam et al., (2016) argue that
such a standard can improve safety climate and safety culture, reduce personal injuries
and factors such as absenteeism. Santos et al., (2013) agree, based on a similar study
conducted with SMEs, some of whom had introduced an OHSMS, while others had
Page | 19
not sought certification. The study concluded that the SMEs who had achieved
certification had experienced improved working conditions, compliance with legislation
and more effective internal communication about risks and hazards. The research also
found that resistance to certification was related to the high costs of the process. Those
who had achieved certification were motivated by the need to reduce risks for workers,
conceding that the process was costly with barriers such as problems in motivating
personnel, changing the organisational culture and difficulties with the increased
bureaucracy associated with the process.
Gerbec (2017) makes an important point, stating that implementing a new
management system needs careful consideration of how to introduce such a change
to an organisation to ensure acceptance and long-term success of the process. The
introduction of a new set of organisational standards needs to ensure that there are no
information gaps among the stakeholders in a change, including workers, to engender
acceptance and commitment to the process. This change management process
requires effective communication of the drivers for the change, acceptance and
commitment at senior management level followed by communication with and
involvement of frontline workers in developing and implementing the process. The
process also needs a system of review after implementation to ensure that the
standard is working as intended. It is argued that this may be difficult in an industry
where work is typically project-based and where SMEs generally work as part of a
wider project team, with little control over the external factors that affect occupational
health and safety.
It is evident from the above discourse that there is a bank of research on the need for
a safety culture and recognition of the need for change within the construction industry.
Yet the statistics noted in chapter 1 of this dissertation highlight the persistent problem
of occupational health and safety risks in this industry. It is argued that the level of
accidents, fatalities and work-related illnesses is unacceptable in contemporary
society, with serious adverse effects on construction workers, assets and equipment,
as well as environmental impacts and productivity. These events also harm the public
reputation of the industry and individual organisations and can adversely affect the
market competitiveness of these organisations (Mohammadfam et al., 2016). The
statistics from the HSE (2017) indicate that small organisations and subcontractors
have a higher risk of accidents in construction. This leads to the question of the issues
Page | 20
which impede the uptake of these standards across all organisations in this high-risk
sector. Wu et al., (2015) studied the relationships between safety performance
indicators and goals in the construction industry and concluded that safety
performance in construction sites is affected by four key factors, namely safety climate
and safety culture, as well as safety attitude and safety behaviour. The fact is that there
is a need for significant improvement and the development of new preventive
strategies. It is argued that standardised safety management systems offer a potential
solution to these problems (Abad et al., 2013).
2.4 Summary of Literature Review
In summary it is evident from the above discourse that there are benefits of
standardised safety management systems, including a reduction in accidents and
safety risks. In addition, there is a shift towards integrating different types of
management systems into a single system that deals with safety, business objectives
and organisational goals. There is some evidence to suggest that the benefits of these
systems as an accident-reducing mechanism can be short-term only unless
management is committed to the system and aware of its business benefits, and the
process includes education and training of frontline workers and management. There
is also evidence to suggest that workers in small organisations such as subcontractors
in construction have a higher risk of accidents than other workers. The research also
indicates that barriers to safety management in these organisations include the cost of
such systems, and a lack of capital to invest in training.
Page | 21
Chapter 3
3 Methodology
This research seeks to add to the bank of knowledge on safety in construction and to
add value to the researcher’s organisation in managing safety in relation to
subcontractors. It is important therefore to ensure that the research is progressed in a
coherent and transparent manner (Farrell 2011). To this end the research was
designed in stages as presented in this chapter, starting with the research approach
and strategy, the data collection method and analysis of that data.
3.1 Research Philosophy and Approach
According to Bryman and Bell (2011) it is essential to set out the research philosophy
to set this study in context with wider research on this topic. There are several different
philosophical viewpoints, and each dictate whether this study is underpinned by
quantitative reasoning, qualitative reasoning or a mixture of both. It is noted that
quantitative methods assume that reality is independent of social mechanisms, which
essentially means that the researcher can choose variables such as the number of
accidents on site and the severity of these events to assess the impact of standardised
safety management processes on accident reduction. In contrast, qualitative reasoning
assumes that reality is dependent on social mechanisms - as such this form of study
would seek to understand the link between human behaviour and accidents in relation
to certified and non-certified organisations. In some cases, a researcher can take a
mixed method approach to a study, on the understanding that reality is an independent
entity that is in fact influenced by social mechanisms such as human behaviour
(Fellows and Liu 2015). Based on the above reasoning, it is confirmed that this
research is underpinned by a mixture of qualitative and quantitative reasoning
throughout the study.
There are two key approaches to this type of research, namely inductive and deductive,
where the former seeks to build theory relating to safety management systems and
accidents, and the latter seeks to test theory (Fellows and Liu 2015). In this instance
the research, as highlighted in sections 1.3 and 1.4, seeks to answer a research
question, thereby testing a hypothesis, which confirms that this study is deductive.
Page | 22
3.2 Research Strategy
There are several research strategies that could be used to progress this study,
including case studies, surveys and action research (Bryman and Bell 2011). It is
important to choose the correct strategy to optimise the reliability of the research
outcomes and the usefulness of the research for the researcher’s organisation. As
such Farrell (2011) recommends that each strategy is examined to identify the optimal
strategy taking account of project constraints such as time and costs.
Taking account of this advice, a brief review of each of the above strategies was
conducted, with the following findings;
Case studies offer a flexible form of research whereby the researcher can
choose the variables to be tested. In addition, there are a variety of different
types of case studies, including exploratory or descriptive, which adds to the
flexibility of this approach (Bryman and Bell 2011);
Surveys also offer a flexible form of research, allowing the researcher to define
the research boundaries and variables to be tested. The key to achieving
reliable data is to ensure that the survey sample represents the wider
construction industry and that the survey participants have enough knowledge
of safety management and subcontracting to add value to the study (Fellows
and Liu 2015)
Action research can be useful in assessing the impacts of a change in an
organisation, for example in this study it could be used to assess the impact of
implementing OHSAS or an ISO taking a before and after view of accidents
(Stringer 2013). However, it is argued that in this instance, this poses practical
difficulties in terms of access to the implementation process and accident data.
Given the above information, it was decided that a survey offered the best strategy to
progress this research, based on the researcher’s access to professionals in the
construction industry.
3.3 Data Collection and Analysis
Bryman and Bell (2011) point out that primary or secondary data can be collected in a
survey, with the former typically involving questionnaires and/or interviews and the
latter drawing on published research. Given the complex nature of this topic and
research question, it was decided to gather both forms of data, including secondary
Page | 23
data from a case study on safety intervention measures on a construction site. The
case study was identified during the review of academic literature. The data collected
also included a questionnaire survey of professionals in the construction industry to
gain detailed insight into the use of standard management systems such as OHSAS
and the impact of these systems on accidents.
3.3.1 Questionnaires
This section sets out the development of the questionnaire and selection of the survey
sample.
3.3.1.1 Participants
As previously mentioned, the outcomes of this research are dependent on the reliability
of the survey sample. To this end it was decided to choose a sample of professionals
active in all aspects of construction, using contacts within the researcher’s organisation
and project teams comprising this organisation and other stakeholders. This involved
sending over 400 questionnaires to project leaders/managers and safety auditors in
construction companies, with a response of 167 completed questionnaires. In keeping
with academic standards and data protection regulations, the questionnaire did not
gather personal or commercially sensitive data, and the identity of all participants
remains confidential (Fellows and Liu 2015).
3.3.1.2 Procedure
The questions were developed during the literature review and focus group meetings.
By asking several key questions relating to International Standards and how they can
impact health and safety in the workplace, the focus group helped develop the
questionnaires further. From the focus group this resulted in more than 30 questions
being developed. Each question was reviewed against the research aims and
objectives to ensure the data collected from the responses would add value to this
study. The focus group further reduced the 30-question format to 22 main issues
questions. The questionnaire was again tested using a small group of the researcher’s
peers to ensure the structure was clear and logical. Minor amendments were made
and the questionnaire and emailed to professionals working in the researcher’s
organisation and other construction organisations globally. The data gathered is
analysed using descriptive and data analysis software (IBM SPSS) adopting
Cronbach’s Alpha model.
Page | 24
3.4 Summary of Research Design
In summary, this deductive research is underpinned by qualitative and quantitative
reasoning. Several strategies were assessed, and it was decided that the survey
strategy using primary and secondary data was appropriate. The case study was, as
indicated in the next chapter, revealed from a comprehensive review of available
literature, and the questionnaire was developed in a systematic and logical manner.
The data was analysed using descriptive, statistical analysis.
Page | 25
Chapter 4
4 Results
As set out in the previous chapter, this research gathered two forms of data; primary
data using a questionnaire survey of professionals in the construction industry relating
to the benefits/drawbacks of standardised forms of safety management systems and
secondary data using a case study of safety in subcontracting. The purpose of this
chapter is to set out and analyse the data collected. The data is then discussed in the
next chapter.
4.1 Questionnaire Responses
The questionnaire starts by gathering demographic data on the participants to ensure
that this sample is representative of the wider construction industry and that the
participants have enough knowledge of the construction industry and safety issues in
this sector to add value to the study. It is noted that a total of 400 questionnaires were
issued to professionals working in the construction industry, with 167 of these
completed and 33 incomplete disqualifying them from the study, 200 questionnaires
not being returned. This return rate could indicate interest/concern about the topic of
safety and standardised forms of management in the construction industry.
The first question was divided into three parts to establish a demographic for the
participants. The first part asked about gender, with responses indicating that 89% of
the participants were males and 11% were females, as shown in Figure 4.1.
Question 1a -Gender
160
148
140
120
100
80
60
40
19
20
0
Male
Page | 26
Female
Figure 4.1. Responses to Question 1a.
The second part of this question asked the participants about their age, as this is
pertinent to their experience of the construction industry, and, as shown in Figure 4.2,
the responses indicate that many of the participants are aged 27 years or over.
Question 1b. Age of Respondents
56
50.0
60
46 45.0
50
37
40
29.0
30
22
18.0
20
10
6 6
8
6
4
1
0
0
18-20
21-26
27-32
33-38
39-60
Valid
Total
Male
Female
Figure 4.2. Responses to Question 1b.
Question 1c, asked the participants about their salaries as this can be reflective of the
seniority in their organisation and experience of the industry. The responses to this
question, as shown in Figure 4.3 indicate that many of the participants are in the higher
pay grade which implies greater experience within the construction industry.
Question 1c-Salary Bands (GBP)
56
60
50
40
30
30
30
29
45,500-60,000
60,000+
22
20
10
0
22,000-27,000
27,500-33,000
33,500-45,000
Figure 4.3. Number of Responses to Question 1c.
Page | 27
Question 1d asked the participants about the professional background of the participants and as shown in Table 4.1, the sample
included a range of professionals in construction.
Table 4.1. Profession/Roles of the survey groups
Industry
Number of
Designations
questionnaires
Replies to
Incomplete or
Questionnaires failed to reply
Owner operator of a Construction Company That only
supplies labour. Less than five (5) full time employees
105
Owner Operator Managers
Manpower Contractors
59
6
Owner operator of Small construction employing less than
7 staff/workers
96
Owner Operator Manager who uses
Contract Manpower
62
3
Medium size construction company employing up to 30
staff/workers
45
Senior Management who has direct
manpower/Contract manpower
17
5
Heavy industry Construction: Major works, Housing
projects, hotel construction. Bridges and Roads
34
General Managers/Contract
Management
7
5
Oil & Gas
Industry: Petro Chemical, Power plants, Wind farm and
Solar fields
Manufacturing Industry
40
CEO's, Senior Managers
12
0
40
Owner operator managers
4
8
International company with over 500 staff/workers
40
Major Construction Industry
6
6
Totals
400
167
33
Page | 28
Question 1 focuses on the use of International Standardisation (ISO) as a measure in
the reduction of accidents. This is an important question as it addresses a key objective
of this study. The responses shown in Figure 4.4 indicate that many of the participants
either strongly agree (49.1%) or agree (29.9%) that ISO standards have a positive
impact on accident reduction in the construction industry.
100
82
In your organisation would you consider
International Standardisation (ISO) as a
contributor to the reduction of accidents?
80
60
50
40
17
20
10
8
Disagree
Strongly disagree
0
Strongly Agree
Agree
Neutral
Figure 4.4. Responses to Question 1.
Question 2 addresses a fundamental issue in occupational health and safety, asking
the
participants
if,
in
their
experience,
employees/staff
understand
the
purpose/reasoning for management systems and the relationship with accident
reduction. The responses to this question, as illustrated in Figure 4.5, show that many
of the participants (70%) strongly agree and agree with this notion.
In the context of your organisation do staff
understand the reasoning for management
systems and how having them can reduce the
likelihood of accidents occurring?
100
65
52
50
23
16
11
Neutral
Disagree
Strongly disagree
0
Strongly Agree
Agree
Figure 4.5. Responses to Question 2.
Page | 29
Question 3 seeks to build on the previous question, asking the participants if having
ISO and OHSAS as part of a management system adds value and helps to reduce
accidents in the workplace. The responses to this question, indicated in Figure 4.6,
reveal that just over 50% of the participants strongly agree with this statement, with a
further 25.1% agreeing that these safety management systems/processes add value
to the occupational safety agenda.
Do you think having ISO & OSHAS as part of your
management system adds value and helps to
reduce accidents in the workplace?
85
100
42
50
20
11
9
Disagree
Strongly disagree
0
Stongly Agree
Agree
Netural
Figure 4.6. Responses to Question 3.
Question 4 continues with this theme, asking the participants is ISO and OHSAS
standards improve performance and reduce the need for additional management
systems in their organisation. The responses, shown in Figure 4.7, indicate that the
majority (50.8%) strongly agree/agree that standardised safety management systems
add value and reduce accidents in the workplace, with 23.3% disagreeing/strongly
disagreeing with this statement.
Do you think that ISO & OSHAS standardisation
can improve performance and reduce the need
for additional management systems in your
organisation?
100
60
50
43
25
30
9
0
Strongly Agree
Page | 30
Agree
Neutral
Disagree
Strongly disagree
Figure 4.7. Responses to Question 4.
The next question asks the participants if management systems play a role in accident
reduction, and as shown in Figure 4.8, many of the participants agree or strongly agree
that management systems can be useful in reducing accidents and serious accidents.
Do management systems play a part in reduction
of accidents and serious incidents?
100
77
80
64
60
40
17
20
5
4
0
Strongly Agree
Agree
Neutral
Disagree
Strongly disagree
Figure 4.8. Responses to Question 5.
The literature review indicated that in some organisations there is resistance to the use
of standardised management systems: as such Question 6 was included to ascertain
if ISO and OHSAS do not add perceived value to a participant’s organisation or are
believed to just add to the workload of the internal auditors. The responses shown in
Figure 4.9 highlight the level of support for these occupational safety management
systems, with the majority (73%) disagreeing and strongly disagreeing with this
statement.
Do you think that ISO & OSHAS do not add value
to your organisation or just add to workload of
the internal auditors?
150
112
100
33
50
5
7
Strongly Agree
Agree
10
0
Neutral
Disagree
Strongly disagree
Figure 4.9. Responses to Question 6.
It is noted however that 20% of the participants held no view on this statement and 7%
took the view that these standards simply added to the workload for internal auditors.
Page | 31
Question 7 seeks to build on the previous questions, asking the participants if having
a robust management system plays a part in the reduction of accidents or serious
incidents. The responses to this question indicate a strong correlation to previous
responses, as indicated in Figure 4.10.
Do you consider having a robust management
system as playing any part in the reduction of
accidents or serious incidents?
85
100
43
50
23
13
3
0
Strongly Agree
Agree
Neutral
Disagree
Strongly disagree
Figure 4.10. Responses to Question 7.
Question 8 asked the participants if non-compliance with health and safety
management audits could affect accidents and safety in the workplace. The responses
to this question confirm that 25.7% of the participants strongly agree that compliance
with audits are an important factor in safety enhancement and accident reduction, with
56.2% agreeing with this statement.
Do you consider non-compliances raised during
ISO & OSHAS Audits as adding value in the
reduction of accidents or serious incidents?
94
100
80
60
43
40
7
20
18
5
0
Strongly Agree
Agree
Neutral
Disagree
Strongly disagree
Figure 4.11. Responses to Question 8.
Interestingly there is a core group of the participants who do not support the concept
of standardised management systems in safety as indicated by the persistent 10-27%
of participants who hold negative or neutral views relating to standardised systems in
the construction industry.
Page | 32
Question 9 relates to the fact that in some organisations, the use of a standardised
system is simply used to promote the commercial reputation/activities of the
organisation and as such there is a risk that management do not pay sufficient attention
to non-compliances, which could increase the level of accidents in the longer term.
This question was therefore included to test this hypothesis. The responses indicated
in Figure 4.12 suggest that this practice does occur, with 21% agreeing/strongly
agreeing with the statement; however, the responses do indicate that many
participants do not agree, implying that such a practice occurs in a minority of
organisations.
Do you think that senior management consider
ISO & OSHAS as a method for promoting the
company and only pay lip service to noncompliances raised during audits?
89
100
50
12
36
23
7
0
Strongly Agree
Agree
Neutral
Disagree
Strongly disagree
Figure 4.12. Responses to Question 9.
Question 10 askes is there a proactive approach towards internal and external audits
and do senior managers consider this important with the aim of improving health and
safety in the workplace? The responses illustrated in Figure 4.13 indicate that in many
cases (77.8%) senior management does take a proactive stance in relation to audits
and adhering to the safety management standards in improving safety in construction.
Do you consider your senior management as
proactive towards internal and external ISO &
OSHAS Audits with the aim of improving safety
standards within the organisation?
100
77
53
50
13
16
8
Neutral
Disagree
Strongly disagree
0
Strongly Agree
Page | 33
Agree
Figure 4.13. Responses to Question 10.
Question 11 askes the question “do you think” that having a certified management
system proves that you conform to set of standards such as ISO/OHSAS or just having
a management system that is not certified can show the same results. The responses
illustrated in Figure 4.14 indicate that in many cases (76.0%) Do consider having a
management system that is certified demonstrates commitment to proactive safety in
organisations and conforms to specifications set out in the standards.
In Certifying your Management System do you
think it enables your organisation to prove that it
conforms to the specification?
87
100
40
50
12
25
3
0
Stongly Agree
Agree
Netural
Disagree
Strongly disagree
Figure 4.14. Responses to Question 11.
Question 12 askes do you think that more than one system can be as effective as
having many different types of system in place or can you combine them? From the
responses illustrated in Figure 4.15 indicate that (79.6%) consider that by combining
different management systems into one such as ISO45001 can have benefits and
reduce costs, improve the overall quality of the management system by reducing
lengthy procedures and combining them into one.
Integrated Management Systems, it should also be
possible to combine – integrate - common or similar
elements of two or more management subsystems?
93
100
80
60
40
40
27
20
7
0
0
Stongly Agree
Page | 34
Agree
Netural
Disagree
Strongly disagree
Figure 4.15. Responses to Question 12.
Question 13 askes by having an integrated management system that combines several
areas such as health and safety with environmental aspects, do we think performance
of regulated activities such as paperwork, procedures will be managed more
efficiently? From the responses illustrated in Figure 4.16 indicate that (86.82%)
consider having an integrated management system improves the overall performance
and has shown a reduction in un-necessary paperwork by having the combined system
in place.
In the case of an effectively managed integrated system,
the performance of the regulated activities will improve
as well as result in more efficient paperwork of the
101
administration.
150
100
50
34
21
9
2
0
Stongly Agree
Agree
Netural
Disagree
Strongly disagree
Figure 4.16. Responses to Question 13.
Question 14 asks by having one common management system what are the
advantages and what can be a disadvantage? From the responses illustrated in Figure
4.17 indicate that (94%) consider having one common system in place offers
advantages, but also disadvantages. The respondents when asked, have said, by
having one system in place procedures tend to be leaning towards management
benefits and sometime moves away from safety related areas concentrating more on
production, but they considered having one management system in place it is
beneficial when it comes to auditing process.
Page | 35
One common management system has several
advantages, but there could also be
disadvantages?
123
150
100
34
50
7
3
0
Netural
Disagree
Strongly disagree
0
Stongly Agree
Agree
Figure 4.17. Responses to Question 14.
Question 15 askes the respondents how do you look at the financial aspects of
certifications and management systems, what are the long term benefits to
organisations and do they outweigh the initial costs of having certified systems in
place? From the responses illustrated in Figure 4.18 indicate that (95.20%) agree that
the cost factors of certifications should not have a bearing on the management systems
but should be looking at the long term benefits of having a robust system in place, this
outweighs the cost factor for larger companies, but smaller SME’s can find this difficult,
the responses did not show a difference but further investigation could be needed to
drill down cost’s directly related to small sized companies.
The fundamental idea is not to rationalise the cost for the
administrative process for ISO standardisation, as such by
using a certain management system? But what are the
long-term benefits, and do they outweigh the costs?
150
114
100
45
50
3
3
2
Netural
Disagree
Strongly disagree
0
Stongly Agree
Agree
Figure 4.18. Responses to Question 15.
Question 16 states that a management system can be a collection of common-sense
approaches to bring together a safe system of work and organisational structure to
management systems. From the responses illustrated in Figure 4.19 indicate that
(95.40%) agree that a common-sense approach to management systems can be good
practice and will have positive results to improve safety culture in organisations. The
Page | 36
respondents are all most in agreement that having good common sense improves the
way people work and behave, results in my own organisation following this approach
has proved effective over the past 3 years.
A management system is simply a lot of common
sense put into a formal dress–bringing better
order and structure to the way things are
managed?
200
124
100
37
3
3
0
Netural
Disagree
Strongly disagree
0
Stongly Agree
Agree
Figure 4.19. Responses to Question 16.
Question 17 is asking the question of commitment to continual improvement of
management systems by senior and top managers? From the responses illustrated in
Figure 4.20 indicate that (64.67%) agree that Top Management are committed to
continual improvements but with 35.32% disagreeing with the statement further
investigations could be warranted to understand if Top Management are really
committed to improvements or is this an indication of lip service.
Do you think that Top Management express their
commitment towards continual improvement of
your integrated management system and policy?
100
75
35
33
50
12
12
0
Stongly Agree
Agree
Netural
Disagree
Strongly disagree
Figure 4.20. Responses to Question 17.
Question 18 do you think that top management give enough support both in financial
terms and other resources to meet the business requirements when it comes to
certifications like OHSAS & ISO Standards? From the responses illustrated in Figure
4.21 indicate there is a split across the respondents, the Top Management have
responded in the questionnaires that “they give sufficient resources and funds” for
Page | 37
implementing management systems such as OHSAS and ISO, but responses from
lower tier managers and supervisor indicate other. It can be assumed that a difference
of opinions when it comes to allocation of resources for management systems than
those for commercial issues.
In your opinion do top management ensure that
the availability of resources meet the business
requirement or is this a constant issue to get
funds to implement
47
50
35
32
40
13
0
Stongly Agree
Agree
Netural
Disagree
Strongly disagree
Figure 4.21. Responses to Question 18.
Question 19 is asking the question “do you think” Internal auditing acts as an
independent process to obtain reliable information on whether the management
system is working effectively? From the responses illustrated in Figure 4.22 indicate
that (88.83%) of the respondents agree that having internal audits carried out by staff
and having this documented demonstrates commitment to obtaining reliable
information on how the organisation is performing against set standards like OHSAS
and ISO.
Do you consider Internal Audit as a systematic
and independent documented process for
obtaining reliable information on how your
management systems are performing?
200
101
100
39
15
7
3
Netural
Disagree
Strongly disagree
0
Stongly Agree
Agree
Figure 4.22. Responses to Question 19.
Question 20 do you consider that having certification or registration to specific
certification bodies such as Bureau Veritas, your organisation has met and maintained
the requirements of certifications or just maintained the same level to achieve the next
Page | 38
rounds of audits? From the responses illustrated in Figure 4.22 indicate that (54.49%)
most organisations recognise the need for certifications and follow the audit process,
and by carrying out audits this shows commitment to recognised standards, but in
contrast 45.5% of the respondents either were not sure or do not think
registration/certification is necessary to have a good system in place.
By certification or registration, the organisation
has acknowledged the requirements of a certain
system/standard and that these requirements are
followed.
56
60
46
35
40
17
20
13
0
Stongly Agree
Agree
Netural
Disagree
Strongly disagree
Figure 4.23. Responses to Question 20.
From the research carried out the consensus is having certified systems in place
benefits large organisations but for small SME’s this has large financial burdens on
them making it difficult to win contracts. SME’s can still have good management
systems in place but chose not to have a certification process.
Question 21 askes the question, do stakeholders see certifications like OHSAS and
ISO as conformation that businesses use certifications as a method of showing
stakeholders that they are committed to improvements within the organisation through
standardisation policies and working practices. From the responses illustrated in Figure
4.24 indicate that (53.89%) from the survey were senior management who directly
interact with stakeholders and showed that the stakeholders can see that certifications
have value and are important benchmarks in organisations, and with 46% of other
respondents considering certifications as minor issues when communicating with
stakeholders.
Page | 39
The certificate can simplify communication with
external stakeholders?
57
55
60
35
40
16
20
4
0
Stongly Agree
Agree
Netural
Disagree
Strongly disagree
Figure 4.24. Responses to Question 21.
Question 22 asks the question should we have more than one management system in
place or combine to meet organisational needs and improve productivity or does this
add stress and additional burdens on staff? From the responses illustrated in Figure
4.25 indicate that (86.22%) having different management systems running at the same
time will increase the workload of staff and increase the amount of documentation
required to manage the systems.
Implementing separate ISO programs within an
organisation to meet organisational needs is
likely to result into massive document system,
increased financial burdens?
150
103
100
55
50
2
5
2
Netural
Disagree
Strongly disagree
0
Stongly Agree
Agree
Figure 4.25. Responses to Question 22.
The literature review indicates senior management plays a key role in promoting and
supporting a culture of safety on a construction site. This prompted the inclusion of 22
questions, which asked the participants if senior management in their organisation take
a proactive view/stance towards internal and external ISO & OHSAS Audits with the
aim of improving safety standards within the organisation.
4.2
Case study: Rok Building; The Southampton Job Centre Plus contract
This case study was chosen as it illustrates ways in which subcontractors can be
engaged in safety management without necessarily having certification for a safety
Page | 40
management system. The case involved Rok Building which is contracting firm that is
part of Rok plc - the latter has 2250 employees. Rok Building was involved in
construction of a Job Centre Plus in Southampton with a contract value of £3.2 million
for the fit out and new extension project with a programme of 47 weeks. Rok Building
carried out the work, by assuming a management role and engaging established
subcontractors to carry out the building work. A pre-contract risk assessment revealed
that safety risks involved site access, the logistics of receiving lorries and unloading
goods at the site, and storage and delivery of materials to each floor. Other risks
included slips and trips, working at height and out-of-hours working, combined with a
high number of subcontractors on site at any given time. A key factor in the effective
planning of the work was the fact that the main contractor entered into a partnering
agreement with the client, facilitating effective planning and management of the site
prior to commencement of the works. Rok Building paid attention to the quality of the
welfare facilities, providing a canteen which was also used as a central information
centre for the site, displaying information on a range of occupational health and safety
issues from binge drinking to safety initiatives. All workers were required to attend a
full day of induction safety training, at the end of which each worker was awarded a
safety passport for the site, enabling the site induction to focus on the site-specific
information needed by the workforce. A key factor in the success of this process was
that the health and safety officer used the process to engage with workers, asking
questions such as: ‘What was health and safety like on your last site?’ and ‘Can you
tell me anything I can learn from?’ which gave the safety team an opportunity to
establish individuals’ knowledge and attitude on health and safety (HSE 2006, p.1).
Page | 41
Figure 4.14. Hazards information Board (HSE 2006, p.2).
The main contractor’s safety officer used a range of methods to communicate to the
workforce on a regular basis, including the use of a Hazard board as shown in Figure
4.14, which was a large weatherproof white board fixed outside the main site office,
and used by the site manager to provide updates on current/imminent work activities,
the key hazards associated with these activities, and the required preventive and
protective control measures (HSE 2006). The main contractor also put information
points on each floor of the building site, duplicating the information needed by the
workforce including current risk assessments and method statements for the work
activities being carried out on site (HSE 2006).
In addition to communication, the main contractor introduced targeted toolbox talks
which were carried out each week, targeting workers in higher-risk activities. This
process involved showing a DVD and/or a talk from a manufacturer’s representative.
The safety management process also included checking and challenging working
practices throughout the site, by focusing on practical and people-centred actions. Site
management was visible by spending time each day walking the site and talking to
workers and workers were encouraged to voice concerns or to challenge safety
protocols to enhance site safety (HSE 2006).
These measures created a positive working atmosphere, good safety standards and
good working conditions, with only two minor incidences relating to safety (HSE 2006).
Page | 42
Chapter 5
5
Discussion
This chapter provides a reasoned discussion of the above findings, focusing on the
objectives of the study, which, to reiterate, are to explore the link between OHSAS and
other safety management systems and accident reduction. The research also seeks to
understand the barriers challenging the use of these systems in small organisations
such as subcontractors in construction.
5.1
Correlation between safety management systems and the reduction of workplace
accidents and serious incidents
The responses from the questionnaires indicated strong support for the theory that
standardised management systems such as OHSAS can be effective in reducing
accidents in the workplace. This assertion correlates with wider research on this
subject, with Yoon et al., (2013) conducting a study of the implementation of OHSMS
in 100 construction companies which found that the accident rate decreased by 67%
after the introduction of the system and that the rate of fatal accidents decreased by
10.3% over the first five years after implementation. The study also compared accident
data for certified organisations and non-certified organisations - the number of workers
in the certified construction companies ranges from 135,981 to 322,696 - and found
that the accident rate is significantly lower for certified companies than non-certified
companies.
The responses to the questionnaire questions indicated that there can be different
perceptions relating to the benefits of management standards, a point that was also
made by Yoon et al., (2013). For instance, Yoon et al., (2013) carried out a similar
survey using 72 samples from 36 certified organisations in the construction industry,
questioning site general managers and OHS managers. The survey found statistically
significant differences between the two groups in terms of their motivation for
developing OHSMS (p < 0.05). Commonalities between both groups included the fact
that OHSMS was motivated by a lack of systematic health and safety management
within an organisation. There were also differences in the perception of safety between
the two groups, with site managers placing importance on the elimination of health and
safety risks using risk management processes, whereas a key motivation for the OHS
Page | 43
managers was compliance with social responsibility and legal issues ideally using
management reviews.
Lafuente and Abad (2018) conducted research on the relationship between the
adoption of the OHSAS 18001 and business performance in different organisational
contexts, and found that following the implementation of this process, organisations
generally modify existing safety practices to mitigate work accidents, suggesting a
positive relationship between safety management standardised systems and
workplace safety. The research also found that safety learning varied across industry
sectors, where for example highly structured organisations benefit more from safety
knowledge and experience whereas there are fewer benefits for less structured
organisations. The inference from the study is that managers need to focus on the
specific characteristics of the working environment and operational processes when
designing safety systems. For example, in manufacturing industry, processes are
typically rigorously organised, being automated within a highly structured management
environment: as such the adoption of OHSAS 18001 enhances organisational
performance through identification and documentation of risks and the subsequent
implementation of corrective actions, if managers avoid the tendency to focus on shortterm goals only. In other words, the study found that the effective implementation of
OHSAS depends on management’s commitment to the overall goal of accident
reduction, which can be secured if managers are also made aware of the long-term
economic/business benefits of this process. In project-based work environments such
as the construction industry, Lafuente and Abad (2018) concluded that factors relating
to the business operations can neutralise the benefits/effects of the safety system - as
such the adoption of the OHSAS 18001 should be linked to enhanced information
mechanisms to overcome barriers resulting from existing knowledge and practices. Lo
et al. (2014) make a similar comment, arguing that that operational complexity
influences the relationship between the OHSAS 18001 and performance, and agreeing
that OHSAS 18001 does reduce work accidents in the short-term; however long-term
reductions depend on employee incentives to incorporate safety tasks in the day-today operations. This problem can be overcome by training programmes to disseminate
safety knowledge to employees, to increase knowledge and raise awareness of the
risks associated with the workplace/activity.
Page | 44
5.2
Safety Management Systems and Small Organisations in Construction
The safety record of a construction site depends on the performance of each
organisation working on that site, and management’s overall control of safety
processes and safe behaviour (Hinze et al., 2013; Hughes and Ferret 2012). The
inference is that if a main contractor is unable to control the behaviour and working
practices of subcontractors, then this can result in accidents regardless of the
performance of workers employed directly employed by the main contractor (Fang and
Wu 2013). It is argued that the significance of the role of the main contractor and site
management is evident in the case study set out in the previous chapter.
According to Cunningham et al., (2018) small organisations in construction have
several vulnerabilities including a transient workforce, high levels of foreign/non-native
workers and different levels of experience/training and education. In this type of work
environment vulnerability with respect to accidents and safety risks are influenced by
social structures such as the temporary workforce and the size of the business. Within
these organisations, a worker may have multiple and overlapping vulnerabilities: for
example, they may have a temporary employment contract, and be an immigrant
whose first language is not English. A worker may also be young, inexperienced and
working in a non-union business. These vulnerabilities make workers accept working
conditions that would otherwise be unacceptable. In terms of organisational
vulnerabilities, the findings from the literature review indicate that small businesses do
not have the capital to invest in safety training - as such, regardless of the social and/or
employment vulnerabilities, all workers in this sector potentially lack enough safety
training. It is argued that it is the interaction of these cumulative risks which increases
the risk of accidents in small organisations in construction (Cunningham et al., 2018).
Vierendeels et al., (2018) point out that safety in an organisation is related to a range
of factors including safety climate and attitude, which dictate safety behaviour. Safety
can be enhanced by technology, procedures, training and risk perception. These in
turn require a systematic approach to safety management taking account of the
workplace activities and environment, as well as workers’ attitudes. Essentially safety
can be enhanced through effective training of workers and commitment to a safety
agenda by management. According to Lingard et al., (2010), subcontractors are
concerned about safety and the majority carry out basic safety training prior to each
new project. However, it is also obvious that there is little formal training of operatives
Page | 45
beyond this process. This correlates with research conducted by Cunningham et al.,
(2018) who found that the difficulty is that small organisations do not have the finances
and, in some cases, the organisational structure to go beyond the basics of what is
legally required by safety regulations.
That said, the case study revealed that there are measures that a main contractor can
take to incentivise subcontractors towards safe working practices. There is evidence
to support this theory in the research with Eriksson and Westerberg (2011) arguing that
main contractors typically choose subcontractors based on price, which may result in
the selection of a subcontractor who does not prioritise safety. This can result in
accidents, delays and higher costs in the longer term. The solution is to select
subcontractors based on a range of factors including safety records, safety
management processes and systems and attitude to safety.
According to Myers (2016) subcontracting is essential to an effective construction
industry, adding that this form of project delivery has evolved as a protective
mechanism due to the industry’s susceptibility to fluctuations in the economy. In other
words, large construction organisations such as main contractors use subcontracting
to offload the risk of recession, the cost of permanent employees and to provide
flexibility if needed during a recession. The difficulty is that there can be confusion over
health and safety responsibilities in a dynamic environment such as a construction site,
where main contractors are responsible for overall site safety and safety induction for
all workers but may not be directly responsible for safe working practices of individual
subcontractors. The situation is exacerbated by the fact that construction is a highly
pressurised working environment, where subcontractors are typically pushed to
complete work to tight deadlines and minimal profit (Loosemore and Andonakis 2007).
Melia et al., (2008) make a similar point, suggesting that the use of subcontractors on
site includes complex management relationships between the subcontractor and the
main contractor and between subcontractors. In these relationships, workers who are
at the frontline of safety risks have a loose relationship with the main contractor and
other subcontractors and at the same time can be isolated from senior management
of their own organisation. This means that the culture of safety and safe working
practices are dependent on-site management of the subcontracted workers, with
Lingard et al., (2010) maintaining that there is a greater chance of subcontracted
construction workers adopting unsafe work practices if site management takes a lack
Page | 46
attitude to safety. In research on subcontractors and safety, Lingard et al., (2010) found
that the subcontractor’s attitude and response to safety could be influenced by the
organisational safety response (OSR) of the main contractor and by the supervisor
safety response (SSR). The study found that the main contractor’s OSR could have a
positive influence on the safety climate of the subcontractors they engage when senior
management in the main contractor organisation are perceived as highly committed to
health and safety. This suggests that even if a subcontractor does not have a
standardised safety management system, the main contractor can use leadership and
site management teams to positively influence safety among the subcontracted
organisations/workers on that site. The study also found that SSR was important within
the subcontracting organisation, as workers typically perceive that supervisors from
their own organisation are more interested in their safety than main contractors.
5.3
Safety Culture and Accidents
It is suggested that the findings of the questionnaire, the case study and the literature
review indicate the benefits of a standard form of safety management and highlight
practical ways in which a main contractor can encourage safety within subcontractor
organisations. It is argued that the underlying factor in the success of all these
measures is safety culture, defined as the individual/group values and attitudes,
perceptions and competencies, which determine commitment to an organisation’s
health and safety policy and management plan. It is argued that where there a culture
of safety culture at an organisation level this result in reduced injury rates, and from an
economic perspective, this minimises the cost of accidents and insurance premiums
(Rajaprasad and Chalapathi 2015). Mahmoudi et al., (2014) argue that there are a
myriad of factors affecting safety on construction sites, including the attitude of
workers, safety prevention measures and management’s commitment to safety.
Worker behaviour is a key to safety in construction given that the behaviour of frontline
employees in promoting safe or unsafe working practice will ultimately determine the
level and severity of workplace accidents. This in turn is linked to worker training, the
provision of safety equipment and experience (Ghasemi et al., 2015). This point is
reinforced by the case study and the data collected from the questionnaires. It suggests
that a key factor in the success of standardised safety management processes is that
these systems facilitate a structured approach to risk, management of these risks and
implementation of safety policy (Vinodkumar and Bhasi 2011). At the same time, the
Page | 47
case study reveals that the attitude of the main contractor towards overall site safety
and the performance of the subcontractor can have a positive impact on safety and
accident reduction, provided there are clear policies, forms of communication and
investment in training (Lingard et al., 2010; HSE 2006).
Agwu (2012) makes an important point, arguing that safety within an organisation is
dependent on the culture of safety among workers, as such any attempt to improve
safety and reduce risk, needs to address the culture within the organisation from
management to frontline workers. In other words, safety policies require commitment
from senior management and at an organisational level, safety policy needs to be
integrated with other business activities forming an integral element of the business
objectives.
Amir-Heidari et al., (2017) argue that effective health and safety management in
construction is dependent on firstly determining key performance indicators for safety
and then setting processes in place to manage these factors. Fauzey et al., (2015) take
the view that all organisations in the construction industry need to adhere to safety,
health and environmental guidelines. This requires identification of key hazards and
environmental aspects associated with the work being carried out, considering the
safety risk level several, the severity of impact, and the scale of that impact (workers,
the public) as well as the regulatory implications and business cost of an accident. In
addition, risk management should include reputation and wider problems linked to poor
safety management.
Badri et al., (2012) submit that increased legislation and regulations on site safety has
increased recognition of the need to incorporate safety management into overall
project management. As such there is greater knowledge, awareness and experience
of processes such as risk management particularly in relation to hazardous activities.
HSE (2015) add that risk management is a fundamental element in determining the
risks associated with construction activities and compliance with current legislation.
Once the risks associated with a site, a project or a specific activity are understood
then suitable mitigation measures can be implemented with clear levels of
responsibility for action.
Page | 48
Chapter 6
6
Recommendations
This research recommends a series of actions for management of construction
organisations and safety professionals. These recommendations, based on the
previous chapters, are derived from the understanding that standardisation of safety
management systems can have a positive impact on accidents in the construction
industry. However, these benefits can only be realised if the process is designed and
implemented with input from all levels of the organisation’s workforce, from frontline
workers to senior management.
It is noted that there are significant benefits to these processes, and it is recommended
that, to optimise such benefits, an organisation should take an integrated approach to
safety management, ensuring that safety goals and policies form an integral part of the
business plan, rather than an add-on.
Management offer the key to success: as such it is recommended that all managers
should be offered suitable safety training to raise risk awareness and understanding of
the wider benefits of commitment to safety management.
Management should make every effort to engage with workers in safety issues,
including regular communication with workers about risks and safety hazards, carrying
out inspections and having zero-tolerance for non-compliance. Such a demonstrable
commitment to safety will facilitate and support a culture of safety among workers.
It is evident from the above study that small organisations struggle to invest in
standardised safety management systems, yet this does not mean that these
organisations are not concerned by safety and accidents. These organisations are
required to comply with safety regulations, and it is submitted are also interested in the
welfare of their workers. It is recommended that main contractors bridge the gap
between this desire for safety and the implementation of effective safety policies by
creating an inclusive working environment for all subcontractors. The benefits of such
inclusion include fewer accidents, a positive working environment and higher levels of
productivity.
Page | 49
Ultimately this research recommends that organisations in construction seek to build a
culture of safety within their organisations, through education, training and
communication of risks, and implementation of safety protocols.
Page | 50
Chapter 7
7
Conclusion and Reflection
This chapter provides a resume of the findings and conclusion of this research, along
with a reflection on the study.
7.1
Findings and Conclusion
This research set out to explore the correlation between safety management systems
such as OHSAS 18001:2007 / ISO 45001:2018 and the reduction of workplace
accidents and serious incidents. This research finds that these standard forms of safety
management have a positive impact on safety in construction and in reducing
accidents in the workplace. There is evidence to suggest that these reductions occur
in the short-term; however longer-term reductions require management’s commitment
to the process, and an understanding of the safety and business benefits of integrating
safety management as part of the business goals, processes and operations.
The research confirms that the construction industry is fragmented and dominated by
small organisations, the majority of which employ less than 10 workers. In addition, the
working environment includes large volumes of self-employed workers, and foreign
labour. In short workers in these organisations are vulnerable to accidents, a fact
supported by accident statistics. The competitive environment of the industry combined
with the high-risk nature of the physical work carried out on construction sites, reinforce
these vulnerabilities, suggesting a need for safety management processes in these
SMEs. The difficultly is that the competitive environment means that many of these
organisations have low profit margins with little capital to invest in training what is
typically a transient/temporary workforce. At the same time this research confirms the
need for all organisations to take an integrated approach to safety, despite the
mismatch of certified versus non-certified organisations.
It is concluded that it is in the best interests of safety and workers for main contractors
to take a more proactive role in safety management of SMEs involved in a project, by
developing
an
inclusive
safety
management
system
and
including
these
workers/organisations in safety training and communication. The benefits include a
safer working environment for all project stakeholders and higher levels of productivity.
Finally, the research finds that the main weapon against accidents in construction is
the development of a safe working culture. This process can be made easier through
Page | 51
the introduction of a standardised safety management system; however non-certified
organisations can also reduce accidents by promoting a culture of safety through
training, worker involvement and effective communication.
7.2
Reflection
This project has been a steep learning curve in research. It is suggested that specific
elements of the study have provided a useful insight into detailed elements of safety in
construction and will add long-term value to this researcher’s career. The limitations of
the study are linked to the questionnaire survey, which it is conceded could have been
used to collect additional detailed data, using for example some open-style questions
to gather opinion on safety management systems from the professional participants. It
is also suggested that, given additional time and space, it would have been useful to
gather primary data from subcontractors in the industry, to assess the challenges of
standardised management systems from a different perspective. That said, this
research provides an interesting snapshot of a complex problem and has provided the
researcher with an excellent grounding in the subject of safety management at site
level which will be useful in workplace activities.
Page | 52
Chapter 8
8 References
Abad, J., Lafuente, E., Vilajosana, J., 2013. An assessment of the OHSAS 18001 certification
process: objective drivers and consequences on safety performance and labour productivity.
Safety Science, 60, pp.47-56.
Agwu, M.O., 2012. Impact of employee’s safety culture on organisational performance in
shell bonny terminal integrated project (BTIP). European Journal of Business and Social
Sciences 1(5), pp.70-82.
Amir-Heidari, P., Maknoon, R., Taheri, B. and Bazyari, M., 2017. A new framework for HSE
performance measurement and monitoring. Safety science, 100, pp.157-167.
Arewa, A.O. and Farrell, P., 2012. September. A review of compliance with health and safety
regulations and economic performance in small and medium construction enterprises.
In Procs 28th Annual ARCOM Conference (pp. 3-5).
Arocena, P., and Nuez, I., 2010. An empirical analysis of the effectiveness of occupational
health and safety management system in SMEs. International Small Business Journal 28 (4),
398-419.
Badri, A., Gbodossou, A. and Nadeau, S., 2012. Occupational health and safety risks:
Towards the integration into project management. Safety science, 50(2), pp.190-198.
British Standards Institute, 2015. ISO 14001:2015 How your organization will benefit
Executive Briefing. London: BSI.
British Standards Institute, 2018. OHSAS 18001:2007 Health and Safety Management (OHS).
[online]. Available at <https://www.bsigroup.com/en-GB/ohsas-18001-occupational-healthand-safety/> [accessed 21st September 2018].
Bryman, A. and Bell, E., 2011. Business research methods. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Choudhry, R.M., 2014. Behavior-based safety on construction sites: A case study. Accident
Analysis & Prevention, 70, pp.14-23.
Cronbach’s alpha from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cronbach%27s_alpha > [accessed 10th May 2019]
Cunningham, T.R., Guerin, R.J., Keller, B.M., Flynn, M.A., Salgado, C. and Hudson, D.,
2018. Differences in safety training among smaller and larger construction firms with nonnative workers: Evidence of overlapping vulnerabilities. Safety science, 103, pp.62-69.
Demirkesen, S. and Arditi, D., 2015. Construction safety personnel's perceptions of safety
training practices. International Journal of Project Management, 33(5), pp.1160-1169.
Department for Business Innovation and Skills, 2013. UK Construction. An economic analysis
of the sector. London: BIS.
Eriksson, P.E. and Westerberg, M., 2011. Effects of cooperative procurement procedures on
construction project performance: A conceptual framework. International journal of project
management, 29(2), pp.197-208.
Page | 53
Esmaeil, B., Hallowell, M., and Roucheray, M., 2012. Developing a framework for measuring
the effectiveness of common fall prevention/protection practices. Proc., International
Conference on Sustainable Design, Engineering, and Construction. ASCE, Fort Worth, TX,
pp. 719–726.
Fang, D. and Wu, H., 2013. Development of a Safety Culture Interaction (SCI) model for
construction projects. Safety science, 57, pp.138-149.
Farrell, P., 2011. Writing a built environment dissertation: practical guidance and examples.
Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.
Fauzey, I.H.M., Nateghi, F., Mohammadi, F. and Ismail, F., 2015. Emergent occupational
safety & health and environmental issues of demolition work: Towards public
environment. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 168, pp.41-51.
Fellows, R.F. and Liu, A.M., 2015. Research methods for construction. Chichester: John
Wiley & Sons.
Fung, I.W., Tam, V.W., Lo, T.Y. and Lu, L.L., 2010. Developing a risk assessment model for
construction safety. International Journal of Project Management, 28(6), pp.593-600.
Gerbec, M., 2013. Supporting organizational learning by comparing activities and outcomes
of the safety-management system. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process
Industries, 26(6), pp.1113-1127.
Gerbec, M., 2017. Safety change management–A new method for integrated management of
organizational and technical changes. Safety Science, 100, pp.225-234.
Ghasemi, F., Mohammadfam, I., Soltanian, A.R., Mahmoudi, S. and Zarei, E., 2015.
Surprising incentive: An instrument for promoting safety performance of construction
employees. Safety and health at work, 6(3), pp.227-232.
Hasle, P. and Zwetsloot, G., 2011. Editorial: occupational health and safety management
systems: issues and challenges. Safety Science, 49, pp. 961-963.
Health and Safety Executive, 2006. Rok Building The Southampton Job Centre Plus contract.
[online]. Available at <http://www.hse.gov.uk/construction/engagement/rokbuilding.pdf>
[accessed 29th September 2018].
Health and Safety Executive, 2015. Construction Design and Management Regulations.
London: HSE.
Health and Safety Executive, 2017. Health and safety statistics for the construction sector in
Great Britain, 2017. [online]. Available at
<http://www.hse.gov.uk/statistics/industry/construction/construction.pdf> [accessed 28th
September 2018].
Health and Safety Executive, 2018. Workplace fatal injuries in Great Britain 2018. [online].
Available at <http://www.hse.gov.uk/statistics/pdf/fatalinjuries.pdf.> [accessed 28th
November 2018].
Hinze, J., Thurman, S. and Wehle, A., 2013. Leading indicators of construction safety
performance. Safety science, 51(1), pp.23-28.
HM Government, 2013. Construction 2025. London: HM Government.
Page | 54
Hosny, G., Elsayed, E.A., El gamal AA, and Shalaby EA., 2014. Intervention Program for
occupational health, safety and environmental standards among workers in Petroleum
Industry: a case study. International Research Journal of Scientific Finding, 1, pp.73-81.
Hughes, P. and Ferrett, E., 2012. Introduction to Health and Safety in Construction: The
Handbook for the NEBOSH National Certificate in Construction: Health and Safety.
Abingdon: Routledge.
İnan, U.H., Gül, S. and Yılmaz, H., 2017. A multiple attribute decision model to compare the
firms’ occupational health and safety management perspectives. Safety science, 91, pp.221231.
International Organization for Standardization, 2018a. ISO 45001 - Occupational health and
safety. [online]. Available at <https://www.iso.org/iso-45001-occupational-health-andsafety.html> [accessed 20th September 2018].
International Organization for Standardization, 2018b. Are you ready for ISO 45001? ISO
focus March-April 2018, London: ISO, pp. 6-15.
Kim, Y., Park, J. and Park, M., 2016. Creating a culture of prevention in occupational safety
and health practice. Safety and health at work, 7(2), pp.89-96.
Lafuente, E. and Abad, J., 2018. Analysis of the relationship between the adoption of the
OHSAS 18001 and business performance in different organizational contexts. Safety
science, 103, pp.12-22.
Ledesma, A.S.T., Fernandaz Muniz, B., Montes Peon, J.M. and Vazquez Ordas, C.J., 2009.
Spanish survey reveals motivations, obstacles and benefits of OHSAS 18001
certification. ISO Manage Syst, 9, pp.36-40.
Leung, M.Y., Liang, Q. and Olomolaiye, P., 2015. Impact of job stressors and stress on the
safety behavior and accidents of construction workers. Journal of Management in
Engineering, 32(1), p.04015019.
Li, Y. and Guldenmund, F.W., 2018. Safety management systems: A broad overview of the
literature. Safety Science, 103, pp.94-123.
Lingard, H.C., Cooke, T. and Blismas, N., 2010. Safety climate in conditions of construction
subcontracting: a multi‐level analysis. Construction Management and Economics, 28(8),
pp.813-825.
Likert, R. (1932). A Technique for the Measurement of Attitudes. Archives of Psychology,
140, 1–55.
Likert’s management system from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Likert%27s_management_systems > [accessed 10th May 2019]
Lo, C.K., Pagell, M., Fan, D., Wiengarten, F. and Yeung, A.C., 2014. OHSAS 18001
certification and operating performance: The role of complexity and coupling. Journal of
Operations Management, 32(5), pp.268-280.
Loosemore, M. and Andonakis, N., 2007. Barriers to implementing OHS reforms –The
experiences of small subcontractors in the Australian Construction Industry. International
Journal of Project Management, 25, pp.579–588
Page | 55
Mahmoudi, S., Ghasemi, F., Mohammadfam, I. and Soleimani, E., 2014. Framework for
continuous assessment and improvement of occupational health and safety issues in
construction companies. Safety and health at work, 5(3), pp.125-130.
Management Theory of Rensis Likert, By Jeanne Dininni
https://www.business.com/articles/management-theory-of-rensis-likert/> [accessed 10th May
2019]
Marhani, M.A., Adnan, H. and Ismail, F., 2013. OHSAS 18001: A pilot study of towards
sustainable construction in Malaysia. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 85, pp.51-60.
McLeod, S. A. (2008, Oct 24). Likert scale. Retrieved from
https://www.simplypsychology.org/likert-scale.html> [accessed 19th May 2019]
Melia, J. L., Mearns, K., Silva, S. A., and Lima, M. L., 2008. Safety climate responses and the
perceived risk of accidents in the construction industry. Safety Science, 46, pp.949-958.
Mohammadfam, I., Kamalinia, M., Momeni, M., Golmohammadi, R., Hamidi, Y. and
Soltanian, A., 2016. Developing an integrated decision-making approach to assess and
promote the effectiveness of occupational health and safety management systems. Journal of
Cleaner Production, 127, pp.119-133.
Myers, D., 2016. Construction economics: A new approach. Abingdon: Routledge.
Naoum, S., 2012. Dissertation research and writing for construction students. Abingdon:
Routledge.
NQA, 2009. OHSAS 18001. Guide to implementing a Health & Safety Management System.
Dunstable: NQA.
Rajaprasad, S.V.S. and Chalapathi, P.V., 2015. Factors influencing implementation of
OHSAS 18001 in Indian construction organizations: interpretive structural modeling
approach. Safety and health at work, 6(3), pp.200-205.
Rhodes, C., 2015. Briefing Paper Number 01432, Construction industry: statistics and policy.
London: House of Commons Library.
Rhodes, C., 2017. Briefing Paper Number 06152 Business statistics. London: House of
Commons Library.
Santos, G., Barros, S., Mendes, F. and Lopes, N., 2013. The main benefits associated with
health and safety management systems certification in Portuguese small and medium
enterprises post quality management system certification. Safety Science, 51, pp. 29-36.
Sanz-Calcedo, J.G., González, A.G., López, O., Salgado, D.R., Cambero, I. and Herrera, J.M.,
2015. Analysis on integrated management of the quality, environment and safety on the
industrial projects. Procedia Engineering, 132, pp.140-145.
Silva, S.A., Carvalho, H., Oliveira, M.J., Fialho, T., Soares, C.G. and Jacinto, C., 2017.
Organizational practices for learning with work accidents throughout their information
cycle. Safety science, 99, pp.102-114.
Sousa, V., Almeida, N.M. and Dias, L.A., 2015. Risk-based management of occupational
safety and health in the construction industry–Part 2: Quantitative model. Safety science, 74,
pp.184-194.
Page | 56
Statistics How To. Statistics for the rest of us.
https://www.statisticshowto.datasciencecentral.com/probability-and-statistics/> [accessed 10th
May 2019]
Stringer, E.T., 2013. Action research. London: Sage Publications.
Thomas, M.J., 2012. A systematic review of the effectiveness of safety management
systems (No. AR-2011-148). Canberra, Australia: Australian Transport Safety Bureau.
Vierendeels, G., Reniers, G., van Nunen, K. and Ponnet, K., 2018. An integrative conceptual
framework for safety culture: The Egg Aggregated Model (TEAM) of safety culture. Safety
science, 103, pp.323-339.
Vinodkumar, M.N. and Bhasi, M., 2011. A study on the impact of management system
certification on safety management. Safety science, 49(3), pp.498-507.
Wachter, J.K. and Yorio, P.L., 2014. A system of safety management practices and worker
engagement for reducing and preventing accidents: An empirical and theoretical
investigation. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 68, pp.117-130.
Walker, A., 2015. Project management in construction. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.
Wu, X., Liu, Q., Zhang, L., Skibniewski, M.J. and Wang, Y., 2015. Prospective safety
performance evaluation on construction sites. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 78, pp.58-72.
Yoon, S.J., Lin, H.K., Chen, G., Yi, S., Choi, J. and Rui, Z., 2013. Effect of occupational
health and safety management system on work-related accident rate and differences of
occupational health and safety management system awareness between managers in South
Korea's construction industry. Safety and health at work, 4(4), pp.201-209.
Zhou, Z., Goh, Y.M. and Li, Q., 2015. Overview and analysis of safety management studies
in the construction industry. Safety science, 72, pp.337-350.
Page | 57
ANNEX A
General Information leading to the research for the project
Annex A | 1
Contents Annex A
Introduction ....................................................................................................... A3
A1.1 General Information .................................................................................. A3
A1.2 Participation email .................................................................................... A4
A1.2.1 Ethics Approval ..................................................................................... A6
A1.3 Focus group transcripts ............................................................................ A9
A1.3.1 Summary of focus group results (general group) .................................. A11
A1.3.2 Summary of focus group results (management group) ......................... A12
A1.4 Survey Questionnaires ............................................................................. A13
Annex A | 2
A1 Introduction
A1.1 General Information
This annex provides details for the approvals process to carry out the research project, “What
is the correlation between safety management systems and International Organization for
Standardization (ISO 45001:2018 - OHSAS 18001:2007) and the reduction of workplace
accidents and serious incidents?”.
A1.2 Participation email
400 letters sent out to different sectors of the construction industry and manufacturing sectors
inviting people to take part in the study by completing a survey questionnaire, also inviting
them to take part in formal interviews.
A1.2.1 Ethics committee acceptance and conformation to carry out the study in accordance with
University standards.
A1.3 Focus group transcripts
The transcripts from two rounds of interviews that led to the 30 questions being developed for
the questionnaires.
A1.3.1 Summary of focus group results (general group)
A1.3.2 Summary of focus group results (management group)
A1.4 Development of Questionnaires
30 questions were developed from two rounds of discussions with focus groups. The two rounds
of questionnaires resulted in 22 questions being included in the main study, and with the
remaining 10 questions also analysed but not used in the main body of the text.
A1.5 Survey Questions
Annex A | 3
A1.2 Participation email
Dear Participant
I am currently enrolled for master’s degree specialising in Risk and Safety Management, by Strathclyde
University Glasgow Scotland. I am in the process of conducting research about. “What is the correlation
between safety management systems and OHSAS 18001:2007, ISO 45001:2018 in the reduction of
workplace accidents and serious incidents?”. The data from this study will be used for my MSc
dissertation. The Information will help to develop a strategy for my own organisation who are having
contractor difficulties due to Corporate instructions only to use contractors who are ISO/OHSAS
Registered.
I would be grateful if you would take part in my study by completing this questionnaire. You do not have
to put your name on the questionnaire. Your questionnaire will only be seen by the researcher and it will
not be possible to identify you from your answers in my dissertation.
Your participation in this research project is completely voluntary. You may decline altogether or leave
blank any questions you don’t wish to answer. There are no known risks to participation beyond those
encountered in everyday life. Your responses will remain confidential and anonymous. Data from this
research will be kept under lock and key and reported only as a collective combined total. No one other
than the researcher will know your individual answers to this questionnaire.
You can withdraw your consent at any time during this process.
If you agree to participate in this project, please answer the questions on the questionnaire as best you
can.
It should take approximately Fifteen minutes (15) too complete. Please return the questionnaire as soon
as possible and no later than 16th February 2019 to be considered in the research project. Completed
questionnaires to the email address: malcolm.ballantyne.2017@uni.strath.ac.uk
If you have any questions about this project, feel free to contact me at the email or telephone number
supplied. I will be happy to share all information relating to the study, stating the results gained during
evaluation of the questionnaires. As researcher I will ensure that all questions are asked in a manner to
make all participants comfortable and not put under any pressure to return or answer questions that they
feel uncomfortable with.
Malcolm Ballantyne (originator)
Thank you for participating.
If you are willing to be interviewed as part of the study, please indicate by selecting the check box and
signing the last page of the study.
Annex A | 4
Yes
Please indicate if you would like to take part in the Interview process
☐
No
☐
If you have any questions/concerns, during or after the investigation, or wish to contact an independent
person to whom any questions may be directed, or further information may be sought from, please
contact:
Secretary to the University Ethics Committee
Research & Knowledge Exchange Services
University of Strathclyde Graham Hills Building
50 George Street
Glasgow
G1 1QE
Telephone: 0141 548 3707
Email: ethics@strath.ac.uk
Annex A | 5
A1.2.1 Ethics Approval
Name of Researcher: Malcolm Ballantyne
Proposed title of Project/Dissertation: What is the correlation between safety management
systems and ISO 45001:2018, OHSAS 18001:2007 and the reduction of workplace accidents
and serious incidents?
Yes
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Does your research activity involve only data taken from
historical and/or literary databases or documents? If this
answer is yes, please skip to question 11.
Recruitment procedures
Does your research activity involve working with or
interviewing live people?
Does your research activity involve persons less than 18 years
of age? If yes, please provide further information.
Does your research activity involve people with learning or
communication difficulties?
Is your research activity likely to involve people involved in
illegal activities? If so, please provide further information.
Does your research activity involve people belonging to a
vulnerable group, other than those noted above? If so, please
provide further information.
Does your research activity involve people who are, or are
likely to become your clients? If so, please provide further
information.
Does your research activity provide for people for whom
English is not their first language? Please provide further
information on how this will be provided, or, if it will not be
provided, please explain why not.
Some of the questionnaires will be sent out to colleagues
where English is not their first language, but they are all
working in projects where “English” is the working language.
The questions will be designed in simple language in order
that the respondents can understand with ease. If questions
are not answered these will be disregarded in the final analysis
stating that incomplete forms returned. This will not affect the
rights of the respondents to take part or disqualify them in any
way.
Does your research activity require access to personal
information about participants from other parties (e.g.
teachers, employers), databanks or files? If so, please explain
how you will ensure that use of this data does not contravene
the Data Protection Act and protect the anonymity of subjects.
Do you plan to conceal your own identity during the course of
the research activity? If so, please provide further information
Annex A | 6
No
N/A
x
Yes
x
No
x
x
x
x
x
X
x
x
N/A
(e.g. that this is necessary for the nature of the research,
whether subjects will be contacted directly after the period of
observation).
Use of Databases/Archival Material
11
Does your research activity involve accessing material or data
belonging to someone else? If so, please provide further
information (e.g. who the material/data belong to, what
permission you have to use this material/data in your research,
any restrictions on use or publication set by the owner).
Yes
X
No
N/A
Data will be collected from Internet searches and Publication
of works in journals. All acknowledgements will be duly cited
and referenced according to the University requirements. Any
additional data that requires permission from the originator
will be by written consent.
12
13
14
15
I will be using safety data collected from the company that I
work for. I have been given permission to use all data as
deemed necessary, the data is open to all staff who works for
the company and the group. Acknowledgement of data and
referencing will be in accordance to Strathclyde University
ethics.
Does your research activity involve accessing material at an
archive, library or other repository?
x
I will only be accessing from public domains
Many repositories restrict the use of, or access to, material
x
which is less than 100 years old. If you plan to use this type
of material, will you abide by any restrictions or access
conditions the repository imposes? (This may include
anonymising data.)
Will you agree to any normal terms of use the repository may
x
impose such as the use of pencils, restriction on use of
photography, taking care of the material, etc.?
Consent Procedures for Living Subjects (if any)
Please provide details of the consent procedures that you intend to use for obtaining
informed consent from all living subjects (including parental consent for children). You
should provide details of how you will let subjects know that participation is voluntary and
that they can withdraw at any time. You should also provide details of the processes for
giving potential subjects adequate time for considering participation and for obtaining
written consent.
If research is observational, please advise how subjects will provide consent for being
observed. If any of these issues are not applicable to your research or if you do not intend
to address them for reasons of research methodology, please provide further information.
Annex A | 7
The participation in the research project will be 100% voluntary and all participants will have to
option to withdraw permissions at any time for the process without prejudice.
The questionnaire is designed that participants who wish to complete and return are fully aware of
the scope and limitations of the survey. By returning the questionnaires the participants have agreed
to take part in the process.
Timeline will be set for the return of the questionnaires. I intend to send out 25 to 30 questionnaires
to gauge the response and from that I will modify the amount of questions sent out to the main study
group. The test questionnaires will be sent out with a two-week timeline.
Interviews if conducted will be carried out via Skype/facetime due to my location in Saudi Arabia
and participants can volunteer by indicating on the survey questionnaire by marking the check box.
Where possible face to face meetings will take place.
Possible Harm to Living Participants (if any)
16
Is there any realistic risk of any subjects experiencing either physical or psychological
discomfort or distress? Or any realistic risk of them experiencing a detriment to their
interests as a result of participation? If so, please provide details of what this might be and
how you intend to address such issues.
There is no risk to participants in any form, all information is confidential, and they are not required
to put names on the questionnaires.
Data Protection
17
Please provide details of how you intend to ensure that data is stored securely and in line
with the requirements of the Data Protection Act (which only applies to living people).
Please give specific consideration to whether any non-anonymised and/or personalised data
will be generated and/or stored and what precautions you will put in place regarding access
you might have to documents containing sensitive data about living individuals that is not
publicly available elsewhere? If your research relates to the latter, please consider the
consent of the subjects, including instances where consent is not sought.
All questionnaires collected will be in the safe custody of the researcher and will be kept under lock
and key. The information will be retained by the researcher for a limited time to complete the
research and submit for consideration of the University Board. The printed information will be
destroyed by shredding and safe disposal, media files relating to the survey will be deleted from all
computer storage devises on completion of the research process.
It is the responsibility of all researchers to ensure that they follow the University’s various
policies designed to ensure good research practice. This includes providing appropriate
information sheets and consent forms for living individuals, and ensuring confidentiality in the
storage and use of data. Any significant change in the question, design or conduct over the
course of the research activity should be notified to your tutor and may require a new application
for ethics approval.
Please attach the following with this form:
Draft Participant information form and consent form (where appropriate)
Draft Questionnaire (where appropriate)
The University Ethics Committee has drafted templates for researchers to use as a starting point
when developing a Participant Information Sheet and Consent Form for their projects.
These can be found at: http://www.strath.ac.uk/ethics/informationsheetandconsentform/
Annex A | 8
A1.3 Focus Group Transcript
Topic 1: In your organisation do you have a robust management system in place
From the discussion the group had a positive approach to management systems and
many of the participants said that their system was robust and tested on a scheduled
basis. It was noted that no negative comments on any one system.
Topic 2: Procedures and how they are managed in relation to auditing process
It was generally accepted that procedures had to be in line with standards and that
internal auditors had to be familiar with them in order to carryout audits. The group felt
the procedures they have within their organisations were enough to cover all elements
of the businesses.
Topic 3: Can Standardisation such as ISO or OHSAS improve performance and reduce
accidents
The group agreed that having a standard (ISO/OHSAS) in place demonstrated to staff
and shareholders that companies were committed to safety. There were two negative
points raised that large companies have better resources and manpower to carryout
audits and fund the cost of expensive certifications.
Topic 4: Do you think that ISO & OHSAS do not add value to your organisation or just
add to workload of the internal auditors
The question confused some members of the group, not sure if they should answer the
question, when pressed the group said that in general audits produced positive results
but when more than one of the auditors are needed it became a burden to some
companies, but all agreed that it added value with internal audit results highlighting
issues previously missed.
Topic 5: International Standards as a method for promoting company values
There were no negative comments from the group but responded that they felt if you
have a good health and safety management system in place then using the ISO &
OHSAS logos improved the chances of winning contracts.
Topic 6: Cost of Certifications
Annex A | 9
The group had mixed feelings on the cost and administration of certification. Several
of the group agreed that small size organisations with less than 10 staff were at a
disadvantage as to those who were major employers. It was generally agreed that
certification costs have increased in the past 4 years with changes to standards, like
ISO14001:2007 changing to 14001:2015 and now OHSAS18001 changing to
ISO45001:2018 this had put smaller organisations at a real disadvantage at
tenders/bidding for contracts.
Topic 7: Do you consider value for money for ISO Standardisation certifications?
The general feeling from all the group that cost factors although high do add value to
the organisation. The shareholders from the large organisations encouraged the
certifications. Again, the smaller organisation representatives in the group said that the
financial cost was high but to compete with major organisations they had to find the
extra resources to compete.
Topic 8: Do you think ISO standards and certifications are waste of time and money in
relation to what benefits you get from having them?
From the group those managers who had more than 100 staff found that cost was
minimal and did not have any comments as their management fully supported the
financial costs, however, the small business owner said bluntly that for them
ISO/OHSAS did not really add any value to the turnover of the business but did say
that the certifications were seen by others as important. The consensus was that
certifications are needed to be competitive in the current market.
Topic 9: In your opinion do top management ensure that the availability of resources meet the
business requirement or is this a constant issue to get funds to implement?
The group made up of management were all in agreement that they all provide funds and make
time available for auditing process. There was one comment that during periods where work
schedules are busy the internal auditors were informed to take less time than normal and just to
look at basic areas such as previous audit findings for the close outs only.
Annex A | 10
A1.3.1 Table: Summary of focus group results (general group)
Focus group qualitative theme data – Construction Organisations: Owners, manager, team leaders
and Internal auditors
Topics Discussed
General feel of the
Themes Detected
group
1 In your organisation do you have
Positive
Safety management systems
a robust management system in
already in place
place
Not sure if ISO/OHSAS was
compulsory
2
Procedures and how they are
managed in relation to auditing
process
Positive response
3
Can Standardisation such as ISO
or OHSAS improve performance
and reduce accidents
Mostly positive
4
Do you think that ISO & OHSAS
do not add value to your
organisation or just add to
workload of the internal auditors
Mostly positive but
with reservations
from several of the
group
5
International Standards as a
method for promoting company
values
Cost of certifications
All in agreement
Do you consider value for money
for ISO Standardisation
certifications?
Do you think ISO standards and
certifications are waste of time
and money in relation to what
benefits you get from having
them?
Natural response
from small business
owners/managers
Generally positive
6
7
8
Annex A | 11
Mixture of positive
and negative
depending who was
asked
How a Quality internal audit made
for easier external audits
Large organisations have many
procedures that must be managed
by at least one member of staff
Communication, staff awareness of
set procedures and KPI’s were all
discussed
Less value for small companies, but
for the larger organisations it added
customers who are only committed
to using ISO/OHSAS approved
companies
Stakeholders were the main
thinking points
Financial constraints on small
organisations.
Large organisations have in place
trained teams for internal audits
reducing the time for External
Auditors such as Bureau VERITAS
Same results as in the above point
In large organisations useful for
promoting the company and the
logos are valued. Small companies
like the idea of certification but have
to be realistic when planning audits
to maintain certifications
A1.3.2 Table: Summary of focus group results (management group)
Focus group qualitative theme data – Construction Organisations: Owners, manager, team leaders
and Internal auditors
Times
Amount of different people
Theme
mentioned
mentioning the theme
1
Change management
4
3
2
Good management commitment to internal
5
6
audits
3
Good H&S integrated programs
10
4
4
H&S Team driving most programs
3
3
5
Contractor impacts when asked if they have
6
6
ISO/OHSAS certifications
6
Excessive resources
3
1
7
Reporting good tools
6
4
8
Financial impact of ISO - OHSAS
6
6
Annex A | 12
A1.4 Survey Questions
Demographic
Age Group
Salary band (GBP) Monthly
Industry
Designation
Q1: In your organisation would you consider International standardisation (ISO) as a
contributor to the reduction of accidents and incidents related to safety
Q2: In the context of your organisation? Do staff understand the reasoning for
management systems and how having them can reduce the likelihood of accidents
occurring
Q3: Do you think having ISO & OHSAS as part of your management system adds
value and helps to reduce accidents in the workplace.
Q4: Do you think that ISO & OHSAS standardisation can improve performance and
reduce the need for additional management systems in your organisation.
Q5: Do management systems play a part in reduction of accidents and serious
incidents
Q6: Do you think that ISO & OHSAS do not add value to your organisation or just add
to workload of the internal auditors
Q7: Do you consider having a robust management system as playing any part in the
reduction of accidents or serious incidents.
Q8: Do you consider non-compliances raised during ISO & OHSAS Audits as adding
value in the reduction of accidents or serious incidents.
Q9: Do you think that senior management consider ISO & OHSAS as a method for
promoting the company and only carryout lip service to non-compliances raised
during audits.
Q10: Do you consider your senior management as proactive towards internal and
external ISO & OHSAS Audits with the aim of improving safety standards within the
organisation.
Annex A | 13
Q11: In Certifying your Management System do you think it enables your
organisation to prove that it conforms to the specification?
Q12: Integrated Management Systems, it should also be possible to combine –
integrate - common or similar elements of two or more management subsystems?
13: In the case of an effectively managed integrated system that the performance of
the regulated activities will improve as well as result in more efficient paperwork of the
administration.
14: One common management system has several advantages, but there could
also be disadvantages?
15: The fundamental idea is not to rationalise the cost for the administrative process
as such by using a certain management system? But what are the long-term
benefits, and do they outweigh the costs?
16: A management system is simply a lot of common sense put into a formal
dress–bringing better order and structure to the way things are managed?
17: Do you think that Top Management express their commitment towards continual
improvement of your integrated management system and policy?
18: In your opinion do top management ensure that the availability of resources meet the
business requirement or is this a constant issue to get funds to implement
19: Do you consider Internal Audit as a systematic and independent documented process for
obtaining reliable information on how your management systems are performing?
20: By a certification or registration, the organisation is acknowledged to have
included the requirements of a certain system/standard and that these requirements
are followed.
21: The certificate can simplify communication with external stakeholders?
22: The benefits of ISO 14001/OHSAS18001 encourages top management to take a critical
look at areas that are vulnerable to environmental impacts
23: Implementing separate ISO programs within an organisation to meet organisational needs
is likely to result into massive document system, increased financial burdens?
Annex A | 14
24: With one system in place is it likely to be more effective and efficient in making everyone in
the organisation responsible for safety?
25: Do you consider the new ISO 45001:2018 Standards will improve your business
model and save time and resources?
26: Do you think that the changes from OHSAS 18001:2007 to ISO 4501:2018 will
have an impact on safety in your organisation?
27: By combining OHSAS 18001:2007 into ISO 45001:2018 do you think it will
reduce the amount of Internal and External Audits carried out in your organisation
and save time and resources?
28: Do you consider value for money for ISO Standardisation certifications?
29: Do you think ISO standards and certifications are waste of time and money in
relation to what benefits you get from having them?
30: Do you think that your organisation is better off having ISO certifications to those
of your competitors who do not subscribe to ISO standards?
Annex A | 15
ANNEX B
Results Obtained from Questionnaires
Annex B | 1
Contents
Annex B .......................................................................................................................... B2
B1.1 Introduction............................................................................................................ B3
B1.2 Processing the Results ........................................................................................... B3
B1.3 Results from Questionnaires .................................................................................. B3
Frequency Tables Cronbach’ Alpha ............................................................................... B3
Annex B | 2
B1.1 Introduction
This annex contains data results carried out from questionnaires sent out to 400 participants
using Microsoft Word format and sending out in: Emails, hand out of the questionnaires, group
study and training sessions. The questionnaires were sent out to various companies within my
own organisation, which has over 92,000 employees worldwide and operates in most countries
in the world. As part of a worldwide organisation, the researcher has had access to CEO’s,
CFO’s, Senior Managers, Regional Directors, Top Management, Supervisor and General
Workers, this allowed the researcher to have a broad-based group of people to take part in the
survey. The survey was also distributed to Bureau VERITAS Saudi Arabia, Germany, and
Malaysia as part of an International recognised certificating body to get feedback from them on
ISO 45001:2018 Standardisation process.
B1.2 Processing the Results
To process the data collected from the participants all data was processed into Microsoft Excel
data sheets. The data sheets known as spread sheets was used to produce the graphs depicted in
the study. The data analysis was carried out by using Statistical Package for the Social
Sciences (SPSS) data analysis software supplied by IBM. Questions developed using the Likert
Scale and Cronbach’s Alpha for reliability testing.
B1.3 Results from Questionnaires
Demographic/Gender
Question 1a -Gender
200
148
100
19
0
Male
Age Group
Annex B | 3
Female
Question 1b. Age of Respondents
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
56
50.0
46 45.0
37
29.0
22
18.0
6 6
18-20
21-26
8
6
4
0
27-32
33-38
1
39-60
Valid
Total
Male
Female
Salary band (GBP) Monthly
Question 1c-Salary Bands (GBP)
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
56
30
22
30
29
Industry
Q1: In your organisation would you consider International standardisation (ISO) as a
contributor to the reduction of accidents and incidents related to safety
Annex B | 4
In your organisation would you consider
International Standardisation (ISO) as a
contributor to the reduction of accidents?
90
82
80
70
60
50
50
40
30
17
20
10
8
Disagree
Strongly disagree
10
0
Strongly Agree
Mean
Std. Error
.08490
Statistic
1.8623
Agree
Neutral
Std. Deviation
Statistic
1.09718
Variance
Statistic
1.493
Q2: In the context of your organisation? Do staff understand the reasoning for
management systems and how having them can reduce the likelihood of accidents
occurring
In the context of your organisation do staff
understand the reasoning for management
systems and how having them can reduce the
likelihood of accidents occurring?
80
65
52
60
40
23
20
16
11
0
Strongly Agree
Annex B | 5
Agree
Neutral
Disagree
Strongly disagree
Mean
Statistic
2.1377
Std. Error
.09455
Std. Deviation
Statistic
1.22187
Variance
Statistic
1.408
Q3: Do you think having ISO & OHSAS as part of your management system adds
value and helps to reduce accidents in the workplace.
Do you think having ISO & OSHAS as part of your
management system adds value and helps to
reduce accidents in the workplace?
85
100
42
50
20
11
9
Disagree
Strongly disagree
0
Stongly Agree
Mean
Statistic
1.9102
Std. Error
.09181
Agree
Netural
Std. Deviation
Statistic
1.18640
Variance
Statistic
1.218
Q4: Do you think that ISO & OHSAS standardisation can improve performance and
reduce the need for additional management systems in your organisation.
Annex B | 6
Do you think that ISO & OSHAS standardisation
can improve performance and reduce the need
for additional management systems in your
organisation?
100
60
43
50
30
25
9
0
Strongly Agree
Mean
Statistic
2.6467
Std. Error
.08539
Agree
Neutral
Std. Deviation
Statistic
1.10354
Disagree
Strongly disagree
Variance
Statistic
1.218
Q5: Do management systems play a part in reduction of accidents and serious
incidents
Do management systems play a part in reduction
of accidents and serious incidents?
100
80
77
64
60
40
17
20
4
5
0
Strongly Agree
Annex B | 7
Agree
Neutral
Disagree
Strongly disagree
Mean
Statistic
1.8563
Std. Error
.08291
Std. Deviation
Statistic
1.07140
Variance
Statistic
1.148
Q6: Do you think that ISO & OHSAS do not add value to your organisation or just add
to workload of the internal auditors
Do you think that ISO & OSHAS do not add value
to your organisation or just add to workload of
the internal auditors?
150
112
100
33
50
5
7
Strongly Agree
Agree
10
0
Mean
Statistic
3.7605
Std. Error
0.5836
Neutral
Std. Deviation
Statistic
1.75418
Disagree
Strongly disagree
Variance
Statistic
0.569
Q7: Do you consider having a robust management system as playing any part in the
reduction of accidents or serious incidents.
Do you consider having a robust management
system as playing any part in the reduction of
accidents or serious incidents?
85
100
43
50
23
13
3
Neutral
Disagree
Strongly disagree
0
Strongly Agree
Annex B | 8
Agree
Mean
Statistic
1.8383
Std. Error
.08117
Std. Deviation
Statistic
1.04891
Variance
Statistic
1.100
Q8: Do you consider non-compliances raised during ISO & OHSAS Audits as adding
value in the reduction of accidents or serious incidents.
Do you consider non-compliances raised during
ISO & OSHAS Audits as adding value in the
reduction of accidents or serious incidents?
94
100
43
50
18
7
5
0
Strongly Agree
Mean
Statistic
2.0898
Std. Error
.07730
Agree
Neutral
Std. Deviation
Statistic
.99895
Disagree
Strongly disagree
Variance
Statistic
.998
Q9: Do you think that senior management consider ISO & OHSAS as a method for
promoting the company and only carryout lip service to non-compliances raised
during audits.
Annex B | 9
Do you think that senior management consider
ISO & OSHAS as a method for promoting the
company and only pay lip service to non-…
89
100
50
12
36
23
7
0
Strongly Agree
Mean
Statistic
3.6527
Std. Error
.09066
Agree
Neutral
Std. Deviation
Statistic
1.17159
Disagree
Strongly disagree
Variance
Statistic
1.373
Q10: Do you consider your senior management as proactive towards internal and
external ISO & OHSAS Audits with the aim of improving safety standards within the
organisation.
Do you consider your senior management as
proactive towards internal and external ISO &
OSHAS Audits with the aim of improving safety
standards within the organisation?
77
100
50
0
Strongly Agree
Mean
Statistic
1.9521
Std. Error
.09021
Annex B | 10
53
Agree
13
16
8
Neutral
Disagree
Strongly
disagree
Std. Deviation
Statistic
1.16582
Variance
Statistic
1.359
Q11: In Certifying your Management System do you think it enables your
organisation to prove that it conforms to the specification?
In Certifying your Management System do you
think it enables your organisation to prove that
it conforms to the specification?
87
100
40
50
12
25
Netural
Disagree
3
0
Stongly Agree
Mean
Statistic
1.9042
Std. Error
.08998
Agree
Std. Deviation
Statistic
1.16285
Strongly
disagree
Variance
Statistic
1.352
Q12: Integrated Management Systems, it should also be possible to combine –
integrate - common or similar elements of two or more management subsystems?
Integrated Management Systems, it should also
be possible to combine – integrate - common or
similar elements of two or more management
subsystems?
100
93
40
50
27
7
0
Disagree
Strongly
disagree
0
Stongly Agree
Annex B | 11
Agree
Netural
Mean
Statistic
1.6886
Std. Error
.06985
Std. Deviation
Statistic
.89108
Variance
Statistic
.794
Q13: In the case of an effectively managed integrated system that the performance of
the regulated activities will improve as well as result in more efficient paperwork of the
administration.
150
100
In the case of an effectively managed integrated
system, the performance of the regulated activities
will improve as well as result in more efficient
101
paperwork of the administration.
50
34
21
9
2
0
Stongly Agree
Mean
Statistic
1.6647
Std. Error
.07531
Agree
Std. Deviation
Statistic
.973220
Netural
Disagree
Strongly disagree
Variance
Statistic
.947
Q14: One common management system has several advantages, but there could
also be disadvantages?
One common management system has several
advantages, but there could also be disadvantages?
150
123
100
34
50
7
3
0
Netural
Disagree
Strongly disagree
0
Stongly Agree
Annex B | 12
Agree
Mean
Statistic
1.3593
Std. Error
.05648
Std. Deviation
Statistic
.72992
Variance
Statistic
.533
Q15: The fundamental idea is not to rationalise the cost for the administrative
process as such by using a certain management system? But what are the long-term
benefits, and do they outweigh the costs?
The fundamental idea is not to rationalise the cost
for the administrative process for ISO
standardisation, as such by using a certain
management system? But what are the long-term…
150
114
100
45
50
3
3
2
Netural
Disagree
Strongly disagree
0
Stongly Agree
Mean
Statistic
1.4072
Std. Error
.05644
Agree
Std. Deviation
Statistic
.72938
Variance
Statistic
.532
Q16: A management system is simply a lot of common sense put into a formal
dress–bringing better order and structure to the way things are managed?
Annex B | 13
A management system is simply a lot of common
sense put into a formal dress–bringing better order
and structure to the way things are managed?
150
124
100
37
50
3
3
0
Netural
Disagree
Strongly disagree
0
Stongly Agree
Mean
Statistic
1.3114
Std. Error
.04645
Agree
Std. Deviation
Statistic
.60024
Variance
Statistic
.360
Q17: Do you think that Top Management express their commitment towards continual
improvement of your integrated management system and policy?
Do you think that Top Management express their
commitment towards continual improvement of
your integrated management system and policy?
75
80
60
40
35
33
12
20
12
0
Stongly Agree
Annex B | 14
Agree
Netural
Disagree
Strongly disagree
Mean
Statistic
2.5689
Std. Error
.010210
Std. Deviation
Statistic
1.31936
Variance
Statistic
1.741
Q18: In your opinion do top management ensure that the availability of resources meet the
business requirement or is this a constant issue to get funds to implement
In your opinion do top management ensure that the
availability of resources meet the business
requirement or is this a constant issue to get funds
to implement
47
50
35
32
40
13
0
Stongly Agree
Mean
Statistic
2.6228
Std. Error
.10250
Agree
Std. Deviation
Statistic
1.32454
Netural
Disagree
Strongly disagree
Variance
Statistic
1.754
Q19: Do you consider Internal Audit as a systematic and independent documented process for
obtaining reliable information on how your management systems are performing?
Do you consider Internal Audit as a systematic and
independent documented process for obtaining
reliable information on how your management…
150
101
100
50
39
15
7
3
Netural
Disagree
Strongly disagree
0
Stongly Agree
Annex B | 15
Agree
Mean
Statistic
2.0299
Std. Error
.06764
Std. Deviation
Statistic
.87416
Variance
Statistic
.764
Q20: By certification or registration, the organisation has acknowledged the
requirements of a certain system/standard and that these requirements are followed.
By a certification or registration, the organisation is
acknowledged to have included the requirements of
a certain system/standard and that these
requirements are followed.
56
60
46
35
40
17
20
13
0
Stongly Agree
Mean
Statistic
2.6766
Std. Error
.09988
Agree
Std. Deviation
Statistic
1.29070
Netural
Disagree
Strongly disagree
Variance
Statistic
1.666
Q21: The certificate can simplify communication with external stakeholders?
Annex B | 16
The certificate can simplify communication with
external stakeholders?
57
55
60
35
40
16
20
4
0
Stongly Agree
Mean
Statistic
2.7844
Std. Error
.10545
Agree
Std. Deviation
Statistic
1.36267
Netural
Disagree
Strongly disagree
Variance
Statistic
1.857
Q22: The benefits of ISO 14001/OHSAS18001 encourages top management to take a critical
look at areas that are vulnerable to environmental impacts.
The benefits of OSHAS18001 encourages top
management to take a critical look at areas that are
vulnerable
100
89
55
50
4
12
7
Netural
Disagree
Strongly disagree
0
Stongly Agree
Mean
Statistic
1.5269
Std. Error
.06838
Annex B | 17
Agree
Std. Deviation
Statistic
.88368
Variance
Statistic
.781
Q23: Implementing separate ISO programs within an organisation to meet organisational
needs is likely to result into massive document system, increased financial burdens?
Implementing separate ISO programs within an
organisation to meet organisational needs is likely to
result into massive document system, increased
financial burdens?
150
103
100
55
50
2
5
2
Netural
Disagree
Strongly disagree
0
Stongly Agree
Mean
Statistic
1.4910
Std. Error
.05998
Agree
Std. Deviation
Statistic
.77513
Variance
Statistic
.601
Q24: With one system in place is it likely to be more effective and efficient in making everyone
in the organisation responsible for safety?
With one system in place is it likely to be more
effective and efficient in making everyone in the
organisation responsible for safety?
200
155
150
100
50
10
1
1
0
Agree
Netural
Disagree
Strongly disagree
0
Stongly Agree
Annex B | 18
Mean
Statistic
1.1078
Std. Error
.03464
Std. Deviation
Statistic
.44768
Variance
Statistic
.200
Q25: Do you consider the new ISO 45001:2018 Standards will improve your business
model and save time and resources?
Do you consider the new ISO 45001:2018 Standards
will improve your business model and save time and
resources?
200
124
100
26
6
6
5
Agree
Netural
Disagree
Strongly disagree
0
Stongly Agree
Mean
Statistic
1.4551
Std. Error
.07341
Std. Deviation
Statistic
.94873
Variance
Statistic
.900
Q26: Do you think that the changes from OHSAS 18001:2007 to ISO 4501:2018 will
have an impact on safety in your organisation?
Do you think that the changes from OSHAS
18001:2007 to ISO 4501:2018 will have an impact on
safety in your organisation?
100
83
80
73
60
40
20
3
4
4
Netural
Disagree
Strongly disagree
0
Stongly Agree
Annex B | 19
Agree
Mean
Statistic
1.8263
Std. Error
.20420
Std. Deviation
Statistic
2.63887
Variance
Statistic
6.964
Q27: By combining OHSAS 18001:2007 into ISO 45001:2018 do you think it will
reduce the amount of Internal and External Audits carried out in your organisation
and save time and resources?
By combining ISO 14001:2017 and OSHAS
18001:2007 into ISO 45001:2018 do you think it will
reduce the amount of Internal and External Audits
carried out in your organisation and save time and
resources?
150
115
100
38
50
2
7
5
Netural
Disagree
Strongly disagree
0
Stongly Agree
Mean
Statistic
1.4970
Std. Error
.07300
Agree
Std. Deviation
Statistic
.94343
Variance
Statistic
.890
Q28: Do you consider you get value for money for ISO Standardisation certifications?
Annex B | 20
Do you consider you get value for money for ISO
Standardisation certifications?
73
80
47
60
40
21
15
11
20
0
Stongly Agree
Mean
Statistic
3.0838
Std. Error
.09737
Agree
Std. Deviation
Statistic
1.25829
Netural
Disagree
Strongly disagree
Variance
Statistic
1.583
Q29: Do you think ISO standards and certifications are waste of time and money in
relation to what benefits you get from having them?
Do you think ISO standards and certifications are
waste of time and money in relation to what
benefits you get from having them?
60
46
40
27
39
23
32
20
0
Stongly Agree
Mean
Statistic
3.0180
Std. Error
.10760
Annex B | 21
Agree
Std. Deviation
Statistic
1.39047
Netural
Variance
Statistic
1.933
Disagree
Strongly disagree
Q30: Do you think that your organisation is better off having ISO certifications to
those of your competitors who do not subscribe to ISO standards?
Do you think that your organisation is better off
having ISO certifications to those of your
competitors who do not subscribe to ISO standards?
85
100
56
50
21
5
0
0
Stongly Agree
Mean
Statistic
2.8920
Std. Error
.09400
Designations
Annex B | 22
Agree
Std. Deviation
Statistic
1.21473
Netural
Variance
Statistic
1.476
Disagree
Strongly disagree
Descriptive Statistics
N
Gender
Designation
Incomplete
Q1
Q2
Q3
Q4
Q5
Q6
Q7
Q8
Q9
Q10
Q11
Q12
Q13
Q14
Q15
Q16
Q17
Q18
Q19
Q20
Q21
Q22
Q23
Q24
Q25
Q26
Q27
Q28
Q29
Q30
Annex B | 23
Minimum
200
167
37
167
167
167
167
167
167
167
167
167
167
167
167
167
167
167
167
167
167
167
167
167
167
167
167
167
167
167
167
167
167
Maximum
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Std.
Deviation
Mean
2
1.065
2.3293
2.3293
7
1.61858
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
4
5
5
5
4
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
34
5
5
5
5
1.8623
2.1377
1.9102
2.6467
1.8563
3.7605
1.8383
2.0898
3.6527
1.19521
1.9042
1.6886
1.6647
1.3593
1.4072
1.3114
2.5689
2.6228
2.0299
2.6766
2.7844
1.5269
1.491
1.1018
1.4551
1.8263
1.497
3.0838
3.018
2.982
1.09781
1.22187
1.1864
1.10354
1.0714
0.75418
1.04891
0.99895
1.1759
1.16582
1.16285
0.89108
0.9732
0.72992
0.72938
0.60024
1.31936
1.32454
0.87416
1.2907
1.36267
0.88368
0.77513
0.44768
0.94873
2.63887
0.9434
1.25829
1.39047
1.21473
ANNEX C
Cronbach’s Alpha Data Analysis & Likert Scale
Annex C | 2
Contents
C1.0 Introduction to Cronbach’s Alpha ............................................................C4
C1.1 Cronbach’s Alpha definition .....................................................................C4
C1.2 Cronbach’s Alpha .....................................................................................C4
C1.3 Likert Scale ..............................................................................................C5
C2.0 References .............................................................................................. C6
Annex C | 3
C1.0 Introduction to Cronbach’s Alpha
C1.1 Cronbach’s Alpha: Simple definition
Cronbach Alpha was developed by Lee Cronbach in 1951, to measure the reliability of
statistics, α (Or coefficient alpha) or internal consistency. “Reliability” is how well a test
measure what it should be. Cronbach’s alpha tests to see if multiple-question Likert
scale surveys are reliable. These questions measure latent variables — hidden or
unobservable variables like: a person’s conscientiousness, neurosis or openness.
These are very difficult to measure in real life. Cronbach’s alpha will tell you if the test
you have designed is accurately measuring the variable of interest.
C1.2 Cronbach’s Alpha
Cronbach Alpha can be written as a function of the number of the tests and the average
inter-correlation among the items. Below, for the conceptual purposes, we are showing
the formula for the Cronbach’s alpha Formula:
Here N is equal to the number of items, c-bar is the average inter-item covariance
among the items and v-bar equals the average variance
One can see from this formula that if you increase the number of items, you increase
Cronbach’s alpha. Additionally, if the average inter-item correlation is low, alpha will be
low. As the average inter-item correlation increases, Cronbach’s alpha increases as
well (holding the number of items constant). https://stats.idre.ucla.edu/spss/faq/whatdoes-cronbachs-alpha-mean/>[accessed 10th May 2019].
The rule of thumb for interpreting alpha for dichotomous questions (i.e. questions with
multiple choices two or more available answers) or Likert scale questions is:
Annex C | 4
C1.2 Likert Scale
Likert’s management systems are management styles developed by Rensis Likert in
the 1960s. He outlined four systems of management to describe the relationship,
involvement, and roles of managers and subordinates in industrial settings. Likert’s
model was used to develop the survey questionnaire this a five-point rating scheme
applied. Cronbach’s alpha was used to analyse the results for accuracy.
Strongly Agree
Agree
Neutral
Disagree
Strongly Disagree
Annex C | 5
C2.0 References:
Cronbach’s alpha from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cronbach%27s_alpha > [accessed 10th May 2019]
Likert’s management system from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Likert%27s_management_systems > [accessed 10th May
2019]
https://www.statisticshowto.datasciencecentral.com/cronbachs-alpha-spss/>
[accessed 10th May 2019]
Likert, R. (1932). A Technique for the Measurement of Attitudes. Archives of
Psychology, 140, 1–55.
McLeod, S. A. (2008, Oct 24). Likert scale. Retrieved from
https://www.simplypsychology.org/likert-scale.html> [accessed 19th May 2019]
Annex C | 6
Related papers
¿Cómo cautiva a la juventud el neoconservadurismo? Rebeldía, formación e influencers de extrema derecha en Latinoamérica
methaodos. Revista de ciencias sociales, 2023
Jadwal in the Paris Manuscript of the Muntakhab al-Tawārīkh-i Mu‘īnī and Topkapı Sarayı Müzesi Kütüphanesi, B. 411
MUSEUM.KZ. 2023. No. 1(2), 2023
A group of four African oliphants proclaiming an Iberian royal union Luís Urbano Afonso Miguel Metelo de Seixas
KRASS, Urte; SEIXAS, Miguel Metelo de (ed.), Heraldry in Contact – Perspectives and Challenges of a Connective Image Form, Ostfildern, Thorbecke, p. 81-86, 2023
The influence of soil reinforcement on the uplift response of symmetrical anchor plate embedded in sand
Measurement, 2013
Population genetic structure and historical demography of grey mullet, Mugil cephalus, along the coast of China, inferred by analysis of the mitochondrial control region
Biochemical Systematics and Ecology, 2009
Etch pit and γ′ precipitate evolution in controlled Waspaloy microstructures aged at 725, 800 and 875°C
Acta Materialia, 2009
Türkmen Klasik Şairi Mahtumkulu Ferağı ’nın Divanındaki Ölçü Türleri
Avrasya Yazarlar Birliği
Damage Risk Reduction using Indonesian Wooden Culture
Restauro archeologico, 2023
Continual Representation Learning in Written and Spoken Language
HAL (Le Centre pour la Communication Scientifique Directe), 2023
Utilization of Polyacrylamide grafted Brewer Spent Grain (BSG) for Sorption of Cd 2+ , Cu 2+ and Pb 2+ ions in aqueous solution
International Journal of Engineering Trends and Technology (IJETT), 2017
Use of Oral Bisphosphonates in Primary Prevention of Fractures in Postmenopausal Women: A Population-Based Cohort Study
PLOS ONE, 2015
Online Platform for Agricultural Produce Livestock Marketing
International Journal on Recent and Innovation Trends in Computing and Communication, 2021